Join 3,564 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Oponents Jam phone Lines
July 1, 2004 11:30 AM   Subscribe

What would you do if your opponent's elderly constituents needed a ride to vote? Jam their phone lines of course.
posted by LinemanBear (17 comments total)

 
Is it a sad day when politicos steal ideas from a saved by the bell episode?
posted by Dreamghost at 11:41 AM on July 1, 2004


Well, hell. Those voters the Republicans disenfranchised probably were all just traitorous pro-Saddam-ites anyway.

And besides, nobody ever said democracy was a Republican "family value".

Josh Marshall had an early line on the story:

Rather than trying to turn out GOP voters, they figured it would just be easier to sabotage the Democrats’ get-out-the-vote operation instead.... But there were a lot of close races last year [2002]. Was New Hampshire the only place GOP Marketplace was up to no good? Maybe not.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 11:57 AM on July 1, 2004


Why hire a telemarketing firm, Marketplace LLC, for your dirty work, when a pair of wire cutters does the same minus a paper trail? Meaning, was this a business hired for jamming or a telemarketing firm gone bad?
posted by thomcatspike at 12:05 PM on July 1, 2004


Because a cut wire would provide solid, no-arguments proof of sabotage. Keeping the phones busy provides at least the possibility of a way out.
posted by clevershark at 12:26 PM on July 1, 2004


[pre-emptive strike]
Oh yeah?!?

Well, Bill Clinton did it too!!
[/pre-emptive strike]

Are we seeing any kind of consistent pattern yet? :-)
posted by nofundy at 1:08 PM on July 1, 2004


Criminals and thugs. The GOP in a nutshell.
posted by skallas at 1:37 PM on July 1, 2004


If they can't win fair and square, there is no level to which republicans will not sink in their dirty tricks. Allen Raymond and his ilk should be tarred and feathered...on FOX News.
posted by wsg at 1:37 PM on July 1, 2004


Criminals and thugs. The GOP in a nutshell.

Meanwhile, Democrats resort to dirty tricks to try and keep Ralph Nader off the ballot:

"In the interview, Mr. Nader said he had not seen any evidence that Republicans had acted inappropriately and instead accused Democrats of 'dirty tricks' to keep him off ballots. He said that while representatives of an antitax group encouraged Republicans to attend a meeting last Saturday in Portland, Ore., to help him collect 1,000 signatures, he said Democrats were 'infiltrating' the same meeting merely to block other supporters from getting in.

Mr. Nader said Democrats crowded into a meeting hall, kept other people out and gave the false impression that they had signed petitions for him."
posted by gyc at 1:44 PM on July 1, 2004


Way to stay on point, nofundy.
posted by trharlan at 1:57 PM on July 1, 2004


gyc you're really stretching with that one.
posted by Space Coyote at 1:58 PM on July 1, 2004


gyc, the same Oregon where conservative groups got Nader on the ballot?
"Hi, my name is Russ Walker, director of Citizens for a Sound Economy here in Oregon, and I wanted to tell you about an opportunity we have to drive a wedge through the Liberal Left’s base of support.

In this year’s presidential race, Ralph Nader could peel away a lot of Kerry support in Oregon, but he has to be on the ballot first. He will make it if at least 1,000 people show up this Saturday at Benson High school at 4:00 pm and sign the petition to certify his candidacy.
Whoops, looks like the GOP is at it again.
posted by skallas at 2:00 PM on July 1, 2004


Yeah, that's the same as jamming phone lines on voting day!
posted by skallas at 2:02 PM on July 1, 2004


Yeah, that's the same as jamming phone lines on voting day!

I think using dirty tricks to try and keep someone off the ballot and lessen choices for voters is certainly as offensive as keeping someone from voting at all.

gyc, the same Oregon where conservative groups got Nader on the ballot?

What's wrong with giving voters more choices, unless the intention is to coerce voters into voting for the "correct" candidate?
posted by gyc at 2:14 PM on July 1, 2004


gyc, if you truly believe the two actions were comparable (ignore the GOP push for Nader and the hot headed dem reply) then where are the charges? Where is the conviction like we saw here?

I think its pretty obvious that there's a huge difference here and when you include the GOP's bag of dirty tricks just from the past couple of years, there is no real comparision.
posted by skallas at 2:38 PM on July 1, 2004


gyc, if you truly believe the two actions were comparable (ignore the GOP push for Nader and the hot headed dem reply) then where are the charges? Where is the conviction like we saw here?

Sure, they were not comparable legally, but ethically and morally, I consider them comparable. Even though you obviously disagree, I think that restricting a voter's choice of candidates is just as bad as preventing them from voting at all.
posted by gyc at 2:43 PM on July 1, 2004


Lest we forget, voter disenfranchisement is still ongoing in Florida. More are being illegally removed as we converse. And the ones illegally stricken from voter rolls in 2000 have yet to be reinstated. After all, they've only had 4 years to fix the problem!

Are we seeing a consistent pattern yet?
posted by nofundy at 5:27 AM on July 2, 2004


I wish this surprised me.
posted by SisterHavana at 1:31 PM on July 2, 2004


« Older Ben's Game....  |  MEMRI adds a TV monitoring pro... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments