• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

election delays?

Floridays

Cyburbian
Messages
769
Points
21
cnn.com is doing a poll based on the following question:
Should Election Day be delayed if there is a terror attack near that date?

I had to answer "no." If we move/delay Election Day, wouldn't a terror attack simply change with the new date?
It is our constitutional right to vote. I think it would be a BIG mistake to start playing with that potential fire....
 

biscuit

Cyburbian
Messages
3,904
Points
25
The Bushies aren't even to being subtle about this one. First Tom Ridge warns the nation that there may be a terrorist attack around election time. (are you scared yet?) However when asked about the source of such a warning he states that there is no credible threat only that it may occure. (Well duh s%*@ Sherlock, that would be an obvious time for a domestic attack.) Then it is announced the President may need to postpone the elections should an attack occure.

You have got to be kidding me. A postponed election held after an attack would add to our climate of fear and lead to a Bush victory, and worse, to an even more fractured and politically unstable nation.

An election has never been postoned in the history of this country... not even during the Civil War for crying out loud. Any attempts to do so now are blatantly politically manipulative, cynical and undemocratic.
 
Last edited:

jordanb

Cyburbian
Messages
3,232
Points
25
Habeas Corpus is a constitutional right too but that hasn't stopped this administration.
 

Joe Iliff

Reformed City Planner
Messages
1,441
Points
29
Plans, plans . . . .

I've thought about this. It wouldn't take much (relatively) on an election day to keep a lot of people away from the polls. Just like the government (rightly) shut down the airspace for a few days after a terrorist attack, I could see them wanting to shut down polling places in response to the a certain attack or series of attacks, and they would be right to do so.

If something like that happened, I would hope that the Supreme Court would reactively authorize an alternate election procedure that would meet the intent of the Federal Constitution, though the exact dates and deadlines would be altered. With that, they would likely need to direct states to do the same, since we don't really have one national election but fifty concurrent state elections.

Anyways, I like this idea rather than codifying what we would do before such a event. The reaction needs to be customized to the particular situation and the Supreme Court, since they are unaffected by the results of the election, need to be the body to do it.

Thoughts?
 

The One

Cyburbian
Messages
8,289
Points
30
Don't be suprised if.....

Homeland security issues a terror threat for Michigan, Florida, New Mexico and any other so called "battle ground" state.... for the election day week...........
 

Tom R

Cyburbian
Messages
2,274
Points
25
fla

Floridays said:
cnn.com is doing a poll based on the following question:
Should Election Day be delayed .....
A delay may be needed so the Floridians can learn to count. ;-)
 

Seabishop

Cyburbian
Messages
3,838
Points
25
I think we do need to think about what to do in case of a large scale attack during an election. For example, if NYC is attacked again do we just say "Oh, well people in New York don't get to vote this year"? Big cities are the prime terrorist targets and their voting patterns are different than the rest of the country so an attack could lead to a flawed election.

Its sad that so many people don't vote whether terrorists attack or not. The government should outlaw Fear Factor and Will and Grace on election day so that people will get out of the house and vote.
 

Super Amputee Cat

Cyburbian
Messages
2,248
Points
30
I always wondered if something like this could happen. I wouldn't put it past Bush to try and stay in office past January 20 by any means necessary. And I do mean, any means.

Bush stands to gain immensely by another terrorist attack if the timing is right. Probably sometime in October before he has a chance to screw up like he did in 2001. If it happened now, it would be too early and if it happened after November 2 (Election Day) the point is moot anyway.
 

Floridays

Cyburbian
Messages
769
Points
21
The One said:
Homeland security issues a terror threat for Michigan, Florida, New Mexico and any other so called "battle ground" state.... for the election day week...........
I'm in your neck of the woods and have definitely thought about that possibility. Big "swing state" down here.
 

Whose Yur Planner

Cyburbian
Messages
11,406
Points
40
Hmmmmm
Does anyone know a good website for planning jobs in Canada? 8-! And just think, we used to laugh at third world countries and banana republics.
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,487
Points
41
At first I was scared, but then I remembered that my polling place is the neighborhood firehouse, filled with first-responders, so I think I should be safe ;-)

The level of distrust in this nation is starting to scare me: a politician lying about something? Comes with the territory. Believing an administration would cancel an election to remain in power? (Can anybody say coup d'etat???)

I believe it is prudent to consider a scenario where a general election might have to be postponed.
 

NHPlanner

A shadow of my former self
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
9,945
Points
40
Gedunker said:
The level of distrust in this nation is starting to scare me: a politician lying about something? Comes with the territory. Believing an administration would cancel an election to remain in power? (Can anybody say coup d'etat???)
In general, I agree that it's scary to think about the amount of distrust in the US right now.....but this current administration is what's generating it. Given what we know about the current administration, I am concerned that this type of tactic is not above them.
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
I expect my government to at least look at the potential consequences of such an event(s) and to make plans so the government survives. Game planning the potential Al Quaeda nuke strike on DC the day before an election is a reality that should be planned for. It is smart (even to some stupid urban planners who can't look past their facination with Starbucks, Wal-Mart, et.al...).

The fact that you live in a democracy and have the right to hold your government accountable (and the right to keep and bear arms) should ensure we have a legit government come next January. That Second Ammendment sure looks real usable and necessary now since the Patriot Act, don't she?

My guess is that if the survival of this nation and the national faith in our constitutional form of government came down to W handing the country over to John Kerry, and John Jr., during a crisis just to instill confidence in our system, I think he would do so without hesitation. I believe W is the kind of man that would put his nation well ahead of his party, the Saudi Royal Family's secret contracts with the Bush family, Corporate Welfare for his cronies, Haliburton, the Texas Rangers and his Coke Habit (Did I hit all your buzz words?).

On another note, the last election was different - the country was not at war and the legal battle over the presidency - while a pain in the ass - was needed to debug the program. We still didn't fix the process thought. I think politicians at all levels need the gray zone that allows the occasional local fix.

Personally, I'm almost to the point of hoping the John-John Ticket wins. The left needs to make some hard decisions for a change. Fighting the war, sucking up to France and the UN - all the while trying to keep Boston from vaporizing in an Islamic nuke might just snap you paranoid self-doubting planners into shape or doom the country. Either way I get the pleasure of saying "I told you so." So suck it up America Haters - you are likely going to get what you asked for. [Nelson]Ha ha...[/Nelson] :)



The smile at the end makes it all better.
 

Tom R

Cyburbian
Messages
2,274
Points
25
usa

I guess that if the country could have an election admidst a civil war with enemy troops at times in sight of the buildings in the Capitol, I think we can do it now. A major disaster notwithstanding.
 

GeogPlanner

Cyburbian
Messages
1,433
Points
25
It's an attempt to disenfranchise Democrats from voting by creating mass confusion on Election Day. We all know that if the terrorists are going to influence an election, they'll target a "red" state any way.

But seriously, we take pride in the way this nation runs. Postponing a primary is one thing, but a general election or an inauguration is another. In the face of tragedy, the democratic process has always been preserved and it should continue to be that way.
 

Floridays

Cyburbian
Messages
769
Points
21
Tom R said:
A delay may be needed so the Floridians can learn to count. ;-)
Hey now....I are a college grad-ju-it. :)

I did read an article in our local paper when Kerry/Edwards paid a visit to the Ft. Lauderdale airport. Apparently Kerry said that "Edwards has 2 children, ages 4 and 6.....they're good at math....we're going to send them down to West Palm Beach and help them count." OUCH!!!!
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
el Guapo said:
.....My guess is that if the survival of this nation and the national faith in our constitutional form of government came down to W handing the country over to John Kerry, and John Jr., during a crisis just to instill confidence in our system, I think he would do so without hesitation. I believe W is the kind of man that would put his nation well ahead of his party, .......

The smile at the end makes it all better.
Only, so far, there is NO proof that w is such a person.

No, the smiley does not make it better. Scary is scary no matter how you try to label the leaders of an administration that have activly campaigned for, passed laws, violated law, and been chastised for thier abuse of major laws that the country has.
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
I wonder why no one is calling for his impeachment. Clinton can get impeached over lying about a little action in the Oval Office yet no one is demanding answers to the multiple repots showing we were lied to and there was no reason to invad Iraq.

I don't think the Constitution means anything to W. I also don't think he puts the nation before anything- he certainly couldn't manage to put Texas first when he was governor.
 

Zoning Goddess

Cyburbian
Messages
13,852
Points
39
Floridays said:
Hey now....I are a college grad-ju-it. :)

I did read an article in our local paper when Kerry/Edwards paid a visit to the Ft. Lauderdale airport. Apparently Kerry said that "Edwards has 2 children, ages 4 and 6.....they're good at math....we're going to send them down to West Palm Beach and help them count." OUCH!!!!
Too bad Kerry hasn't noticed that it's Yankees like him who can't count (who else would live in Palm Beach?).

Native Floridians can actually do math. We are slllooooww and have the patience to get it right.
 

Chet

Cyburbian Emeritus
Messages
10,623
Points
34
jordanb said:
Habeas Corpus is a constitutional right too but that hasn't stopped this administration.
They are having sex with the dead??!! :-#

el Guapo said:
I expect my government to at least look at the potential consequences of such an event(s) and to make plans so the government survives. Game planning the potential Al Quaeda nuke strike on DC the day before an election is a reality that should be planned for. It is smart (even to some stupid urban planners who can't look past their facination with Starbucks, Wal-Mart, et.al...).
Its amazing how much we agree when we are not talking about motorcycle exhaust systems! The way I see it, out government(s) have preset emergency response plans for a lot of different happenstances. Why not one for this too? Its better than trying to figure it out in the chaos and aftermath of a planned attack. That said, should the public (and the faceless enemy) be told what that plan is? whould it lose its effectiveness if they can plan around it (i.e. a follow up attack or modified approach to the attack)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mgk920

Cyburbian
Messages
4,202
Points
26
Floridays said:
cnn.com is doing a poll based on the following question:
Should Election Day be delayed if there is a terror attack near that date?

I had to answer "no." If we move/delay Election Day, wouldn't a terror attack simply change with the new date?
It is our constitutional right to vote. I think it would be a BIG mistake to start playing with that potential fire....
Actually, there is *NO* requirement or right in the US Constitution for the public to vote in a President/Vice-President election (read it, its text is an eye-opener). Each states' Electors can be chosen in ANY manner that the state's legislature deems appropriate (Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 2), even picking the first so many people in their capitol city's phone book whose names state with 'K', if they so desire. The popular vote elections are only customary, as is the date that they are held (set by law to be the first tuesday after the first monday in November).

Thus, any delay in voting at an 'official' Federal level for President/Vice-President would only be in the date for the Electors to be chosen and to vote (who sit in whatever place the legislature picks in their respective state for the purpose)(Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 4) and forward the results to Congress, where the votes are officially opened and counted on the date set by the Congress (Amendment XII).

As for Congressional elections, see Article I, Section 4, Paragraph 1. There, as in the date for chosing Electors, Congress can change the date of USHouse and Senate popular vote elections, if necessary.

The times that actual terms expire are set by the US Constitution (Amendment XX, Section 1).

Mike
 

Achernar

Cyburbian
Messages
80
Points
4
mgk920 said:
Actually, there is *NO* requirement or right in the US Constitution for the public to vote in a President/Vice-President election (read it, its text is an eye-opener). Each states' Electors can be chosen in ANY manner that the state's legislature deems appropriate (Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 2), even picking the first so many people in their capitol city's phone book whose names state with 'K', if they so desire. The popular vote elections are only customary, as is the date that they are held (set by law to be the first tuesday after the first monday in November).
Amendments XV, XIX, and XXVI do put restrictions on how the Electors are chosen. (Specifically they say people cannot be denied the vote based on race, sex, or age over 18.) Your method of picking from the phone book would of course require amending the constitution of the state in question, and if it got out of hand the Federal legislature could step in again like they did in 1870, 1920, and 1971. Hmmm, that's funny. It looks like it's about every 50 years we get an amendment like this. I can just see Amendment XXXI, adopted 2021: The right of citizens to vote shall not be denied on account of being a clone.
 

mgk920

Cyburbian
Messages
4,202
Points
26
Achernar said:
Amendments XV, XIX, and XXVI do put restrictions on how the Electors are chosen. (Specifically they say people cannot be denied the vote based on race, sex, or age over 18.) Your method of picking from the phone book would of course require amending the constitution of the state in question, and if it got out of hand the Federal legislature could step in again like they did in 1870, 1920, and 1971. Hmmm, that's funny. It looks like it's about every 50 years we get an amendment like this. I can just see Amendment XXXI, adopted 2021: The right of citizens to vote shall not be denied on account of being a clone.
But aside from those very basic non-discrimination limitations, the Federal Constitution is silent on how President/Vice-President Electors may be chosen, it is fully up to the states, and the US Constitution most definitely does NOT require a popular-vote election.

BTW, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment also prevents those who have held any office in the United States and who later rebelled against the United States from being an Elector. It is mainly an historical section adopted as part of post-Civil War reconstruction, but as it is written it also applies to any office-holder who is convicted of treason, espionage, etc.

Mike
 

otterpop

Cyburbian
Messages
6,655
Points
28
No election delays. We didn't do it in WWII and we didn't do it in the Civil War (when the army threatening our nation was literally within striking distance of our capital).

If terrorists try to disrupt our election, we should go on anyway. Would it be an ideal election. of course not.Stuff happens. It happened in the last national election, and while I was not happy with the outcome I am living with it. Same for the next election. It is what we do - we persevere.
 

jordanb

Cyburbian
Messages
3,232
Points
25
Chet said:
They are having sex with the dead??!! :-#
Habeas Corpus is the right of the imprisoned to be charged with a crime. Something the "enemy combatants" in Guantanamo Bay aren't being granted.

The Japanese internment camps in WWII were ruled illegal and disbanded by Writ of Habeas Corpus.
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,487
Points
41
Hypothetical. Let's say on the day before Congress is adjourned in October, the US Capitol is terrorized and many Congressman are killed. As all of the House and 1/3 of the Senate are standing for elections, then what?
 

Budgie

Cyburbian
Messages
5,270
Points
30
Habanero said:
I don't think the Constitution means anything to W. I also don't think he puts the nation before anything- he certainly couldn't manage to put Texas first when he was governor.
I agree with Dubya's lack of regard for certain constitutional freedoms. But I think it should be pointed out that the Governor of Texas carries little weight in running the state. The Attorney General is boss in Texas and Bush was just another figurehead with no teeth. I wouldn't call it on the job training for the Presidency. Texas is a state where the legislature only conveniences every other year.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,174
Points
51
I don’t think that they will change the date, even if there was an attack. If anything, even a threat of an attack will be a good thing for him.

But then again maybe Kerry will want to have the level raised, then say he does not support it once it is.
 

Tranplanner

maudit anglais
Messages
7,917
Points
36
Like GD and NH, I am shocked at the level of distrust displayed by both sides of the political spectrum in the U.S. I'm not a huge fan of the current administration but I find it hard to believe that there is some vast conspiracy out there to turn America into a facist state bent on total world domination. It seems that the current president can't do anything without garnering the most vicious criticism from those opposed to him. I'm not sure he deserves that level of hatred.

I would think it prudent to at least explore the issues involved in delaying or conducting an election under certain circumstances. But such action would need to be carefully considered - success in tampering with the democratic process would only be a victory for the bad guys (terrorists, not republicans).

If you look at anything hard enough, you can find a conspiracy. I think that line of thinking has gone too far.
 

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
Not going to happen

The elections will happen regardless of a terror attack. I plan on voting even if it requires me to put a cow catcher on the front of the truck and grab the guns. Nothing is getting in the way of Rumpy Tuna appearing on the ballot again for a second time. We need the votes in order to get the party more funding.;)

Seriously, if martial law happens and the current pres is still in power, I think it sets up the country to be overthrown by miltia groups who are sick of the way the country has been run by the last few presidents. Some sort of reform is needed on both sides of the political spectrum.
 

chrisinmd

Cyburbian
Messages
322
Points
11
[QUOTE=Rumpy Tunanator]The elections will happen regardless of a terror attack. I plan on voting even if it requires me to put a cow catcher on the front of the truck and grab the guns. Nothing is getting in the way of Rumpy Tuna appearing on the ballot again for a second time. We need the votes in order to get the party more funding.;)

Seriously, if martial law happens and the current pres is still in power, I think it sets up the country to be overthrown by miltia groups who are sick of the way the country has been run by the last few presidents. Some sort of reform is needed on both sides of the political spectrum.[/QUOTE]




Frankly I think we have let all this terroist crap get out of hand. Bush Inc. is playing the American people like a stadivairous, first you're scared then you're reassured that you are safe. The terrorist, if they exist, can't blow up every local courthouse, school building, fire house or other voting place. If they blow up a few buildings in DC, big deal, the country can run very well without the building and if we can loose a few politicans--hell we got plenty of those--they will be replaced by new politicans.
 

The Irish One

Member
Messages
2,267
Points
25
Hypothetical. Let's say on the day before Congress is adjourned in October, the US Capitol is terrorized and many Congressman are killed. As all of the House and 1/3 of the Senate are standing for elections, then what?
G13's baby. There was some talk of putting in ex governors and reps in to power until special elections could be held. Those special elections would be the safest this country has ever had.
 

otterpop

Cyburbian
Messages
6,655
Points
28
chrisinmd said:
[
Seriously, if martial law happens and the current pres is still in power, I think it sets up the country to be overthrown by miltia groups who are sick of the way the country has been run by the last few presidents. Some sort of reform is needed on both sides of the political spectrum.
[/COLOR]

Over thrown by militias? I hope you are kidding. Our history shows that militias have never been effective. The Revolutionary War was won by the Continental Army. The militias were the "summertime soldiers" Patrick Henry wrote about. The militias in the Civil War usually headed home after the first whiff of gunsmoke. The militias in the West were very effective-- at slaughtering non-combatants.

The militia -- the people at the Alamo. The army - won the Battle of San Jacinto.

The current militias, those largely white and racist organizations, are big on talk. In Montana, law enforcement found the way to handle them. Wait until the militia members are alone or in small groups, then overwhelm them with lots of deputies. The militia members are usually as meek as lambs then.

Funny thing, they claim to be anti-government, but the Freedmen sought out government loans, then defaulted on them. That is what got them in trouble. They borrowed our money then wouldn't repay.

Our army, the National Guard (technically a militia but in reality a part of our standing army) or law enforcement would make short work of any militia activities.
 

Wulf9

Member
Messages
923
Points
22
Tranplanner said:
Like GD and NH, I am shocked at the level of distrust displayed by both sides of the political spectrum in the U.S. I'm not a huge fan of the current administration but I find it hard to believe that there is some vast conspiracy out there .....

If you look at anything hard enough, you can find a conspiracy. I think that line of thinking has gone too far.
I sort of wish it were a conspiracy theory. But consider the number of unfortunate things being done by the U.S. that were preceded by a legal opinion such as this. There were legal opinions on detaining without hearings, bending the Geneva Convention, and allowing actions that would be violation of international law for countries other than the U.S. Those opinions were issued with the intent that they would be used. Why would this opinion be any different? Any such opinion should be looked upon as something that is being explored for potential use.
 
Top