Posted on 07/11/2004 3:10:58 PM PDT by wagglebee
Postponed elections ? I don't think that has EVER happened before.
Well, there are three hundred million of us and a few of them. What the heck could they do if anyone not harmed in/affected by the attack made it to their polling place? I say just hold the election. At the risk of sounding facetious, and I'm not trying to, anyone who can't vote will probably have bigger things to worry about.
There's a big difference between a local primary and a national Presidential election. I would be in favor of holding an election while bombs are falling; I certainly wouldn't be in favor of cancellation because of some stinking jihadis' actions.
Dog, calm down, this is more liberal trial balloons. Like the dump Cheney stuff.
It would have to depend on how widespread the attack(s) might be. If they attack only one area, I say we vote as before. If many areas all over the country, well, that's another question. Yet another would be if one or both candidates are hit.
I know, you're right. I meant postpone too, though the thought of threatening to make 43 prez for life made me fell warm and fuzzy all over :) But to heck with postponing it. I say just let anyone who can vote, vote.
I forgot to add: Then Allah help al Qaeda...
Mew..... be honest could you have went to a polling place on the morning of Sept 11,2001 after you saw two American cities attacked and thousands dead.....even if you weren't in those areas.
Yes, the Conservatives will be after their worthless hides, with a real vengeance. However, the 'Rats will probably remain in the fetal position (while waving white flags--difficult but possible) for many months if not years.
Doesn't a national state of emergency stop elections? Can't a president in office during such an emergency remain in office until that state is lifted? If so, why the need for "special" actions?
Fox still 'goes with the flow' on certain issues. Look at Rita Crosby calling Florida for Gore in 2000.
Do you really mean this scenario??
Suitcase nukes go off in three cities one day before the election.
President Bush postpones elections for two weeks.
AlbionGirl moves inexorably against Administration, post haste!
In your mind,...you're already there. (<---old Seinfeld line by Kramer)
I agree, this is a bad idea. We are not Spain..
If it had occurred during a presidential election, especially this one, I'd've gone if I'd had to crawl. We had a family member on his way the site right after it happened. We knew that he was going in response to a terror attack. Nothing would've kept me from voting. Nothing. And if I'm breathing and my polling place is open, nothing will this time, either.
The VP of whomever is President would become President. If the new President (without VP) should be assassinated, then the SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE becomes President. Remember your Civics???
There has never been a time that Speaker of the House has had that opportunity, and I believe we are not far from seeing that happen in our lifetime, especially with terrorism the way it is. I do not believe "Dubya" will have to worry about it as churches, prayer groups, individual christians hold him up daily for protection. I would however expect it if a democrate takes office.
Yes, I believe there are already laws for this sort of thing - I remember reading something on another thread about postponement for a week, and then, if necessary, for another week, or some such thing. I think this is being brought up now so that if - God forbid - it becomes necessary, nobody will say it's an attempt by Bush to stage a coup.
Personally, I think we have to postpone them in the event of a massive terrorist attack (or even a major one), if only because the people in the city affected would not be able to get to the polls and would therefore be deprived of their right to vote, possibly making the elections invalid.
Much would depend upon the scope of the attack. Obviously, if one of the candidates is killed, or if there is such vast disruption that voting would be impossible, it would be necessary to suspend them, always within the limits already established.
What are you insinuating with that term? That the CIA and Al Qaeda work together?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.