Republicans looking for ways to delay election
 

Source

Anyone else find this disturbing?

Re: Republicans looking for ways to delay election
 

How do you get "Republicans looking for ways to delay election" out of this story? There have been a number of reports of bin Laden wanting to disrupt the US election because of the effect the attack had on the Spanish election.

It seems to me that if there were a terror attack just prior to our elction, it would swing support squarely behind the President -- which generally happens in times of national emergency. That being the case, you would think that if there were some kind of Republican plan (conspiracy?), it would be to hold the election come what may.

It's wise to have a contingency plan, as long as it is used only in the case of an actual emergency -- not rumors that there will be one.

I have no problem with it. If we are public and take steps to take terrorists power of terror away from them, they'll be less likely to attack.

I have to admit, a "liberal" media tv station used "White House wants to postpone November election" as their trailer to this story. I fell asleep before the story had come on.

I think we should just have the election tomorrow. No more slimy ads then! It would screw up the terrorists too.

I do think we need some type of "plan B" just in case.

I am not convinced that a terrorist attack at that point would boost Bush in the polls. (granted, I'm biased, but I would think of it this way) If so many of our tax dollars are going to stop terrorism, and we have this new Department of Homeland Security, and we know that something might happen, then we'd better figure out how to stop it! If another attack occurs successfully, then it just shows that we've gotten nowhere in our War on Terrorism.

If we do go on the assumption that it would give Bush an advantage in the election, and we assume, as some posters here have, that Al Qaeda wants Kerry to win, then it makes no sense for them to attack before the election.

Dee

while a plan b is prudent....
al qaeda keeps crying wolf and we haven't yet figured out when to jump or not.

Disturbing - yes, I find it disturbing that we may be looking at another attack. I find it disturbing that these people would want to inflict so much harm on us.

But do I find a contingency plan disturbing - no, I think it's a damn good idea.

Perhaps the thing to do would be to move the election up a week (maybe when it's 3 weeks til election day). It seemed to really disrupt the terrorists in Iraq when we handed power over.

That thought occurred to me as well, but that would probably generate a billion court challanges to the election with people who aren't home, want to vote absentee, etc.

While it seems like enough time for me to react, there are those, in the words of a late friend, "who would bitch if you hung 'em with a new rope."

Wasn't all the talk after 9/11 about going back to your normal lives, other wise the Terrorists win?

I understand the reasoning, but moving the election just seems to disruptive to be practical...plan B's only work when they are feasible.

If legislation was passed beforehand and the matter had enough time to work its way through the courts, it could happen. Of course, if Bush were to win again, we'd have to deal with 4 more years of "selected, not elected" tripe (even though all Florida recounts have shown Bush winning).

So the person who blames this on Republicans, would you label them as ignorant or a liar? This isn't directed at anyone - could be a newspaper, a GC user, who knows who really is that way.

-Rudey

That person could be either one. My guess is tha they just really don't like our current President and want to find new ways to show how he's at the same time corrupt and plotting this master plan all the while being some kind of simpleton with a degree from Yale.

That's just my guess though.

Sept 11, 2001 was a primary election day in New York City. It was rescheduled by the New York State's Board of Elections after the attacks. Spain still held their elections a few days after the March 11, 2004 attacks on their trains. The Popular Party was swept from power in Spain and replaced with Socialist Zapatero.

I hope that we don't need a "Plan B" for the Presidential elections in case of an attack. I hope that we can prevent an attack if one is planned.

I agree that this isn't anything to blame on Republicans or the White House.

These attacks are tough to prevent. I'm sure that these murderers have something in the works. If not, that says a lot for what Bush has done to them vs. what Clinton did.

If something does happen, it'll be interesting to see how the election plays out. Usually, sitting presidents benefit a lot in the polls during times of national crisis. Could have something to do with the fact that Americans are typically brave and the Spanish I guess were reacting as cowards (that's my own assessment of the Spanish election).

I agree that these attacks are tough to prevent. They could have cells working on something despicable. After the first attack on the Twin Towers, the FBI was able to infiltrate a radical group and prevent another terrorist attack intended to cripple Manhattan and the US by blowing up the United Nations, bridges, tunnels, and landmarks. I can only hope that the FBI is as successful at preventing an attack now.

I think that the Spanish tied the attacks on their trains to their involvement in Iraq. They wanted their troops out of Iraq so they voted for someone who would do that. I'm not sure about the word coward, but I do think that they sent a message that they give in to terrorists.

I'm more concerned about the Republican National Convention coming to New York at the end of the summer than I am about the election in November.