Intimidation

I'm getting tired of reading these sorts of idiotic comments about the GOP:

Their schemes to intimidate voters were appalling, but didn't provide the margin of victory in places like Florida and Texas.

What schemes?

Using poll observers?

Sorry, but that's provided for in Texas election law, and in the election laws of most states. In Texas, poll observers are NOT allowed to "intimidate" voters in any manner, and precinct judges can remove poll observers who do not obey the law (which is very specific). And candidates/parties can send their observers to any precincts they want, so Democrats could just as easily go "intimidate" folks in Republican precincts under the law (though I can't imagine any more boring task than being a poll observer at a suburban Republican precinct). So what harm is done by poll observers? Is it a little sunshine that makes people like Conason so nervous? If the election laws and procedures are being followed, why would it be a problem? Once upon a time (Watergate?), Democrats favored sunshine. It's odd that sunshine is now "intimidation."

Or maybe Conason is referring to efforts to bust up organized voter fraud in places like Miami-Dade and St. Louis (or South Dakota and Oklahoma this time around, to name a few instances)?

Count me guilty on that one. I would like to "intimidate" those who would violate the integrity of the ballot and the democratic process, whatever their party affiliation.

Surely Conason can't find THAT problematic.

So what's with these "intimidation" smears? Is this just a more subtle way of playing the race card, or am I missing something?

[Posted at 21:58 CST on 11/06/02] [Link]