DDN Headline: GOP May Skip Poll Watch

[AngryOldDem]

Inexplicably, there is not a link to this.

Story in a nutshell: Montco GOP Chairman John White is now considering not having poll watchers because they may cause more problems than what they're trying to prevent. He said the B of E has told him there is no reason to suspect widespread voter fraud in the county.

White sez: "I have some reservations on the challengers. I know that they will be trained and that they legally can be there...but if this has a high risk of disenfranchisement then the negatives will tremendously outweigh the positives."

White is bucking the state GOP on this.

Dennis Lieberman cuts to the chase: "He (White) recognizes this isn't going to make them look very good on the west side. They're going to have these white men telling black voters they can't vote. He has some legitimate concerns. I found him very open and refreshing."

Pardon me if this has been discussed here, but apparently White's initial concern over fraud had to do with about 2,300 voter registration cards being returned undelivered.

As I said, I wish I could find a link. Mods, if this is inappropriate, please delete or lock. But I thought it was interesting, given the conversation about this topic over the past couple of days.

[mtnester]

1. That paper needs to stick to either "Challengers" or "Watchers"

Two TOTALLY different things.

Challengers - actually challenge voters right to eligibility/vote

Watchers - watch to see if any voters are being denied the right to vote, with assistance provided to any voter who needs it. Will be "watching" the "challengers" hard.

It will be a mess - I can't wait to see the fistfights outside the polls as challengers and watchers duke it out.

I am a watcher in Franklin County - it ought to be interesting.

[AngryOldDem]

3. They are talking about challengers...

...those who could raise legal issues on the spot and force the poll workers to quiz prospective voters to determine if they can vote.

That is why I think White is backing off -- Lieberman's quote said it all.

[mongo]

5. Do you know the one

where you kneel behind the guy your buddy is arguing with and when he gives him a push the guy topples over back-wards?

Just kidding...Maybe.....

Lets hope it don't come to that. I'm decent at defusing situations without backing down. Besides, I'm a heart and kidney patient and try to stay out of fights these days...

But just in case we might want to bring a rope to clothesline some of these challengers on their way out the door <grin>

[Kukesa]

2. Yeah, I think it's interesting, too AOD.

Hopefully we'll discuss this at tonight's Volunteer Meeting at Dem HQ.

Are we to assume there will only be Dem poll watchers on election day?

Maybe they can't get enough Repukes to volunteer? Maybe all those suburban security moms and white males don't want to go to Dayton's West Side? Ya think those BMWs and Lexus vehicles they drive might stand out over there?

[AngryOldDem]

4. I got the sense from HQ...

>>Are we to assume there will only be Dem poll watchers on election day?>>

That the Dems were taking a wait-and-see stance on challengers. If there aren't any Republicans, it's doubtful the Dems would have any. That would not look good and open us up to a lot of grief.

Again -- Lieberman hit it right on the head -- we all know that those who would be the most challenged live in the predominantly minority precincts of the county. The Republicans are smart enough to know that that is a can of worms better left unopened.