Is it too arrogant to suggest that. we flip the Senator problem?

[smartvoter]

Instead of looking for one Senator to challenge the result, we flip the entire process/pressure around to communicate that we'll be watching which ones DON'T stand up, and hold them accountable???

Maybe the pressure needs to be across the board and daring them NOT TO stand up after we, the people, did all this work. It also would remove the political suicide aspect associated with a single signer if were are successful.

What do you think? Am I all wet?

[autorank]

1. OK, I'm very interested. Could you elaborate please.

CORPORATE AMERICA controls the media and we get MANUFACTURED NEWS.
CORPORATE AMERICA now controls the voting machines and we get MANUFACTURED ELECTIONS.

[smartvoter]

4. Just throwing it out on the table at this point, but why couldn't we..

start a campaign that is based on who dares not to stand up, instead of who dares to stand up?

[autorank]

10. Daring a cautious person generally doesn't work. I do like the

macho element of this. In your face, dudes and dudettes. Stand up or be shamed.

I watched the Senate fiasco on C-SPAN with Gore having to preside. It was just awful. I didn't realize how awful it was until I saw it in F911 three plus years later. All the tragedy, waste, and national shame...and no one, not on single one of those multimillionaire Senators would stand up and be counted. This was all the more poignant given the justified pleas of the black Members of Congress and the clear knowledge that FL was crooked and Gore won the popular vote.

I like your idea. Let's start making our 'representatives' squirm.

CORPORATE AMERICA controls the media and we get MANUFACTURED NEWS.
CORPORATE AMERICA now controls the voting machines and we get MANUFACTURED ELECTIONS.

[txindy]

2. Any Democratic or non-neocon repub Senator/Rep who doesn't stand up

will be 'voted' out by the machines in the next election. That may be the message to send them. It gets straight to the heart of the matter. Their days are limited in Congress if this fraud is not stopped here and now. Nothing they do will change that in the future. Nothing they do or say will matter. This is the line that they must cross to save democracy and their own careers.

[loudsue]

30. That might work, if our votes COUNTED!!!

You can't vote 'em out if you never voted 'em IN!!

:kick:

[txindy]

33. That's the whole point

The machines will be rigged to vote them out. Nothing they say or do will save their careers. They need to stand up to the fraud NOW or they will be irrelevant and, by the next election, unemployed. It has nothing to do with the voters. It has EVERYTHING to do with the machines and the fraud. We have a common enemy. They need to face that and respond to it.

[rhite5]

39. I don't think it is helpful to make threats, especially when

you can't possibly carry them out.

Keep it positive.

We expect you, Senator, to stand when the question is called.

We assume you will!

[txindy]

45. To what threats are you referring?

The neocons will use those rigged machines to remove every non-neocon, both Dem and repub, in the next election. People won't be voting them out, the rigged machines will. There's a greater price being paid, if that happens: Not standing up against the fraud is self-destructive at best, but is really enabling the destruction of democracy, itself. It doesn't get any lower than that. That's reality, not a threat.

[FreeCajun]

49. RIGHT ON!

[jamboi]

3. Good idea! n/t

[senegal1]

5. I second it -- good idea.

[mattclearing]

6. That would take a sea change in the current CW, I think.

Our Senators aren't prepared to go to the mat for Kerry, they are terrified of the Republicans, and of what the voters that didn't vote for us this time will do to us next time if we fight and get abused by the media again.

It's totally ridiculous reasoning and seems to be doing us a lot of good the last three elections, but hey, that seems to be their mindset.

You can't teach an old dog new tricks sometimes.

I think in order to shift the debate back leftward we need to do what the GOP does: find the craziest left-wing nutjobs (and I mean that in the best possible sense) that are respectable enough to go on camera and give their right-wing nutjobs a run for their money.

We can be every bit as bold and self-righteously indignant as they can, but this current crop doesn't seem to be up to the task.

Fight fire with fire, I say. As long as it's ethical, let's throw our best extremists at them and shift the debate back towards the middle before it's too late.

Edited for spelling.

[rhite5]

38. They are not being asked to go to the mat for Kerry ....

They are expected to go to the mat for democracy!

That is the message.

[Old and In the Way]

7. Great minds think alike......

:-)

I just finished posting this on another thread-

How about EVERY FRIGGEN' DEMOCRAT SIGN ON TO THIS? Why should 1 Senator take the media/Republican heat when it looks he or she is the only one interested in the integrity of our vote system?

Why isn't every Democrat scrambling to be the first in line to show solidarity with the majority who won the election? Isn't it time that we stopped letting the Republicans beat us senseless....and send a powerful signal that it will not be "business as usual" in the next Congress?

There is strength in numbers, folks. If you don't take the issue on, it'll be your seat that is lost unfairly next. And if you don't show courage to stand up for us....don't be surprised if there isn't a Democratic electorate who'll bother to invest the emotional/financial capital in the next election cycle.

It's now or never people....start acting like the Party that has majority behind you or wimp out and watch your base evaporate.

[smartvoter]

8. Invertebrates seem to respond to "You're either with us or against us."

We got it this far on our own and with third parties. They already have forgotten the lesson of Dean's meteoric rise -- that the only person hated more on the playground than the bully is the wimp.

[Old and In the Way]

13. If I were Reid, I'd jump on this...for so many reasons.

(1) It sets the tone for the next Congress...it won't be "business as usual - he can make it clear now, he's not going to run things like Daschle..
(2) It gives him an organizing point to rally the entire caucus around.
(3) It's the right thing to do for their constituents...we haven't exactly been rewarded by much in the way of our agenda the past 4 years.
(4) He can imprint the need for discipline into the Party....makes those that won't support pay for it.
(5) They ignore this most important issue at their own peril....
(6) If they can't support one of their own (Kerry)....why would we think they'll support us?

[smartvoter]

14. Great points! Especially # 6. n/t

[Carolab]

25. Second that and it is precisely this logic that Dean uses

The idea being that we WILL support progressive candidates that advance the goals we, the people, believe in, but we will NOT focus our time, money and energy on those who won't.

The problem is that many of those who are "in power" are only interested in not rocking the boat lest they lose the support of their "monied, power base" or be "voted out" in rigged elections by the Republicans, publicly reduced to rubble in the media or worse (i.e., plane crash, etc.) Those who CARE about their seats AND ALSO care about the people will ignore the Republican threats and the mainstream media and will be responsive to us and find their voice in the alternative media venues. And, it follows that they they will CARE about the way elections are conducted in this country and working to make sure that the machines are not rigged and voters are not disenfranchised because they will know that their political futures depend on our support, and on making sure that they get OUR VOTES and that those votes are counted.

[juajen]

16. I suggested something similar to this in another thread, but

I suggested a petition signed by liberal/progressive voters demanding support now for voter fraud investigations, etc. and everything it entails or no vote for a dem incumbent in the current congress. I mentioned in that thread that there had to be some exceptions, namely, Dennis Kucinich, John Conyers, Maxine Waters, Lee, etc. IOW, the ones who are now standing up for us. I think it is a very good idea to let them know that their base will shift without strong support on this voting issue. Frankly, if someone doesn't show some backbone, I will vote Green proudly or stay home if there is nobody else to vote for. I like my Senator, Mary Landrieu, but she also could use a nudge. She is much too conservative for my taste, but fits in well in Louisiana. However, I expect her seat to go next if these machines aren't eliminated. I don't believe that Vitter was elected fairly. We do have enough machines and tabulators in the hands of pugs that would make a difference in this state. I also believe that the vote was skimmed here to give * his man-date,

[smartvoter]

19. That's the crux of the issue -- they ARE at risk of losing us. n/t

[Kralizec]

9. Good idea! Send a letter to your Senators saying that you will be

watching when they get a chance to contest the election. Then say if they don't stand up and represent you that you have already cast your last vote for them. This is especially important for those who live in states were fraud was rampant (Florida, Ohio, New Mexico,...). Nice idea!

[jdog]

11. Not just democrats.

Don't you think, the way things are going, we should start making more of an attempt to bring the moderate republicans to our side on this fight? This is more and more becoming an issue of defending our beliefs as to what this country represents, and what it is founded on.

The radical right does NOT represent the majority of americans, and the more people know what is really going on, the more people join in fighting against them. Moderate republicans should be, and I believe are, very concerned.

[smartvoter]

12. Yep. Hit them all. n/t

[Old and In the Way]

15. Moderate Republicans will be extinct in the next few election cycles.

They'll be gunning for Snowe and Collins in their next primaries. I'm sure they'll be facing radical right Republicans more in line with the current Republican leadership's style and political agenda. Neither of them fit the bill. And if they should survive their primaries, we'll take 'em down in the GE. I hope Chellie Pingree runs again against Collins because she'll most definittely win this time.

If they were politically smart, they'd make the decision now to move accross the aisle. This issue would be a good basis on which to make their decision.

[smartvoter]

17. You're dead on. That's where they're headed, sure as hell. n/t

[jdog]

18. What do you think would be the best way to reach them? eom

[Old and In the Way]

20. I've written both a couple of e-mails on this very subject.

I told them it was time to join the first woman Republican Senator, Margaret Chase Smith, and make their own "Declaration of Conscience" speech. I really think they both have it within them to make history by moving accross the aisle. It could well be a major turning point for a lot of moderate Republicans who need to decide what vision for America they want to be associated with.

I think they are a hell of a lot closer to John Kerry's way of thinking then they are to Rove/Frist/DeLay/Bush breed of Republicans.

[OneBlueSky]

21. You know, if one senator, just one senator . . .

stands up, they may think he's really sick and wearing a tinfoil hat.

And if two senators, two senators do it -- in harmony -- they may think they's both faggots and they won't listen to either one of them.

And if three senators do it . . . three, can you imagine, three senators standing up, they may think it's an organization.

And can you, can you imagine fifty senators, I said fifty senators standing up, and friends, they may thinks it's a movement.

And that's what it is . . .the Take-Back-Your-Country Anti-Fascism, Anti-Election Theft Movement! And all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's around on the guitar.

[jdog]

22. That's my kind of music!!!!! n/t

[delphine]

26. The dems don't have

50 senators - they only have 45. And there's no way in hell that any repuke is going to support this.

And there is no way that any of the centrist ass-covering dems will support it.

And Kerry will likely ask his fellow senators NOT to stand up for it.

In the meantime, let's say 45 dem senators stand up for it.

It goes to a house vote supervised by Denny Hastert.

How d'ya suppose they'll vote? I mean the overwhelmingly repuke congress who held up passage of the 9/11 bill because it didn't have the support of the "majority of the majority" - i.e., they didn't give a shit if it made them look bad for not wanting reform, they just didn't want the dems to look good.

No way in hell will THIS congress be reasonable even if there is a mountain of evidence in the form of documentation, eye witnesses and videotape to prove Kerry really won.

Once the electors are certified on the 13th, there is no way it will change, no way they'll do the right thing, no matter what happens. Why? Because they don't have to.

[OneBlueSky]

27. um . . . I was just havin' a little fun . . . :) n/t

.

[ewulf]

29. We only vote by states if a challenge passes, right?

If a challenge passes, somehow, then neither candidate will have a majority (270) in the electoral college, so then the election would go to the house (unless you consider only a majority of the sitting electors as being necessary, but Ohio would have selected electors, they just wouldn't have been seated). If this happened, then the vote for president would be by state, with each state delegation caucusing to decide how their state would vote. The vote to decide if electors get seated is just a simple majority in the usual way.

Am I right?

Just as a curiosity, does anyone know off hand how many effective electoral votes we would have in the congress if we were to caucus by state?

[Dolphyn]

23. Perhaps we could take it even further ...

Fair elections are a matter of integrity and the cornerstone
of our democracy. Any elected official with integrity should
favor fair elections.

Is it reasonable to assume that any elected official who is
not standing up must be benefiting from election fraud, and
to make that assumption known?

[ClassWarrior]

24. I love ideas so crazy they could work.

No, it's not too arrogant. It's truly strategic.

NGU.

[proudbluestater]

28. I like your idea

In my mind, I would phrase it in -- if you'll pardon the expression since the Republicans seem to think they own this word -- patriotic terms. We are not asking that they stand up for John Kerry. We are asking that they stand against fascism and stolen elections, fraud, deceit, and stand UP for democracy and the principles our country was founded on.

Senators, your countrymen require your assistance. Will you turn your back on those that voted you into office?

[ClassWarrior]

44. EXACTLY!

NGU.

[EFerrari]

31. Love it. "No incumbent left behind" strategy

The thing is, it's a double bluff. They know our votes aren't counted but have to pretend they do. This could work.

[moesse]

32. What a great idea! Take to the streets digitally!

I love this idea and think it's exactly the right mindset to go to the Democratic Party with (the entire party - leadership, Senators, Congressmen).

Yesturday while watching the CSpan event, I was really moved and impressed by Green's Cobb. Gave me a lot of pause, I have to say, and I was a pretty faithful Dem throughout the 90's to present.

Perhaps through our words we can make them realize they need to exert their influence for our democracy, flex their muscles and use the friggin' backbone for a change!

That said, I think it needs to wait until the recount in Ohio is done, or at least until somebody posts a succinct compilation of irregularities that can be used as a template for us to use as a basis for our demand.

Anybody want to tackle the concise framing of this in letter form?

[marions ghost]

41. YES GO with this, move on this

Agree with moesse (32) to draft a letter/statement. There could be an optimal time to put it out widely --best to be in synch with the unfolding process and the media coverage. But no reason not to get it underway now, with holidays coming up. Any words, anyone?

This "demand for all to stand up and be counted" really goes to the heart of the matter. We don't want your dregs, your partisan bs, your paralyzed, money-wasting stalemates, your "corrections" that have to be constantly corrected. Not from ANY of you. And why should we agonize to figure out who we should pester to put their heads on the chopping block now for something as basic as voting rights? THEY ALL need to be supporting this.

If they don't do it, then at least we can use this to judge who's on board and keep up the pressure. It would get this big picture challenge out there as a concept. It taps a nerve--in that it points directly to what we REALLY want--a congress solidly committed to fixing a dysfunctional system, starting now.

[geo]

34. I concur enthusiastically....

Sounds like the start of a letter campaign. The change in message is definitely better marketing for our message. I like it and plan to use it myself. Great suggestion! :) -G

[Goldeneye]

35. Bombard them with letters

telling them at least 20% of the country thinks something went wrong. And it did, at the very least (and I'm not trying to minimize this problem) there was serious voter suppression. If they don't stand up they will lose support. Not to mention, if the machines are rigged and we don't get it straightened out...they're not going to be winning reelection too much more anyway.

[rhite5]

36. They ALL must be challenged to stand up!

Forget begging just one to be brave.....

Either the votes of the people count or they don't.

Would any senator dare to remain seated when the question is called?

I am talking about Democrats and Republicans, old timers and freshmen .... ALL of them!

Our approach must be ... we EXPECT them to take a stand and we ASSUME they will?

[smartvoter]

43. Agreed. The "ASSUMPTION" is they will be with us. n/t

[noclonyofthechimp]

37. The senator blast that was posted mentioned that we were watching

in the body of the letter.

[jdog]

40. Now that I slept on it I have to say

I LOVE THIS IDEA!

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

42. Another crucial bit of leverage the DNC has to entice

a Republican senator to stand up is especially powerful--something not even his own party could offer him: the promise of no opponent the next time he runs. Running unopposed is a far better situation for an incumbent than any pledge of campaign cash his own party could ever ante up.

[UTdem]

46. great idea

I wrote Senators Hatch & Bennett, as well as Rep, Cannon (all Rebups) here in Utah. I asked them about the Conyers hearing, all of the reports of fraud and what they intended to do about it. I made it clear that as elected leaders they had an obligation to ensure that all of their constituents votes are correctly counted and that issues of fraud are thoroughly investigated.

I have yet to hear back from any of them.

[smartvoter]

47. Good for you. n/t

[Quakerfriend]

48. Super idea folks

I was daydreaming the other day and thought to myself "Wouldn't it be great if they all stood up....."

[EFerrari]

50. Jes7s, Louey Delano, Marcy Kaptur (Rep, D-Ohio)

is on C-Span 2 right now talking about the vote in the Ukraine!

Is she like my senator Feinstein, a pod person in dem drag?

[Karenca]

51. Letter campaign! :)) nt