Shots Across The Bow

Attack Politics: Attacking the System

I was writing a detailed takedown of the Metro Pulse's endorsement of Kerry when it hit me that it really doesn't matter. Those who are going to vote for Kerry are going to vote for him regardless of what I or anybody else says. The same goes for those who are voting for Bush. There may be some true undecideds out there still, but I don't know any of them.

And this election will not be decided by the undecideds anyway; heck, it's probably not going to be decided by the voters at all. This election will be decided by the courts, and the party with the better lawyers. The contest has shifted; where politicians used to attack each other, we are now treated to the spectacle of politicians attacking the electoral system itself. And that's a damn shame, and quite possibly a tragedy.

While it is primarily the Democrats that are involved in this all out assault, that is only a function of circumstance. While I'd like to believe that the "win at any cost" currents running through the present election are mostly a liberal phenomenon, honesty compels me to admit that the same currents would be flowing on the conservative side if the situations were reversed. In fact, it can be argued that the entire Lewinski/Kenneth Starr mess was an example of the same passions expressed through a different outlet. (Yes, Clinton lied under oath and yes, that's a big deal, and should have been treated that way. But Starr backed into it; If there hadn't been a mentality to "get Clinton" we would never have heard of Monica.) At best, all I can truthfully say is that these attitudes might be confined to the fringe, rather than permeating the mainstream, but even there I have my doubts. But if Republicans started it with an attack on the systems in place for removal of the President, Democrats have targetted another system, more precious and fragile; the electoral process itself.

Already, phalanxes of lawyers are setting up shop in battleground states, ready to contest results unfavorable to Kerry. And you can be sure that Republican lawyers are massing as well, to counter them. Massive "get out the vote" campaigns have resulted in unprecedented numbers of invalid registrations, virtually insuring that the nuumber of people turned away at the polls will be higher than ever before, triggering more legal action. Laws that guard our system against fraud and abuse ensuring a fair count are being ignored, countered or removed completely in the name of fairness. This two pronged attack, stuffing the ballot box with a flood of invalid votes while fighting any attempt to have them discarded attacks the very foundation of our government.

The right to vote is a precious thing, yet it is also fragile because it rests on trust. We believe in our government because we believe in the process that put them in power. We trust that the reults of the election accurately reflects the will of the people. "We the People" is nowhere more evident than on election day. By exercising the franchise, we ensure, insomuch as is possible, that our government remains of, by, and for the citizens of this country.

But what happens if that process breaks down? What happens if we don't believe that the election accurately reflects our will? Take a look at liberal America for that answer. I've watched formerly rational people lose all sense of perspective, vecoming almost caricatures of themselves in their desire for payback. Cruise through DU or some of the other strong left sites, and check the mood.

Bitter, hateful, spite-filled, and angry.

Right or wrong, they feel like they were disenfranchised, and they are willing to go to almost any lengths to make sure it doesn't happen again. In fact, many have gone a step further, and want to ensure that their side wins, regardless of the cost, hence the attacks on our electoral system, the fraudulent registrations, the attacks on GOP campaign headquarters, etc. This election will be a close one, of that, there is little doubt. And, convinced that they were defrauded last time, there are those willing to use fraud and deceit in order to win this one. Thankfully, I was recently reminded that not all Democrats support or condone this kind of activity; many are as worried as I am about this issue. I just wish there were more of them and less of the fire eaters.

So, Nov 2 is coming up soon, and it is sure to be a firestorm of controversy, particularly in the battleground states. Allegations of voter fraud are sure to fly, no matter which candidate comes away with the initial victory. If it's Kerry, it will only be microseconds before challenges and recounts are called for based on the stories of fraud and inelegible voters being registered. Kerry's lawyers will counter with claims that the votes were all legal and should be counted, then go on to make claims of organized disenfranchisement carried out by Republicans on minorities.

So here's my question, and frankly, I don't think there's a good answer to it: If Kerry comes away with a victory based on very slim margins in Ohio, Minnesota, or other battleground states where there are documented instances of election fraud, what would be best for America? Should the Republicans allow a potentially fraudulent election to stand (think JFK and Illinois in 1960), or should they fight for the integrity of the electoral process, with the attendant damage to the electorate and to the electoral process itself?

There's simply no good answer to the question. You either have to accept possibly fraudulent results, or risk weakening the foundation of our government.

Which would you chose?

Posted by Rich at October 25, 2004 2:09 AM | TrackBack