Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Will Bush cancel the 2008 election?-We may have about a year to prepare (Wasserman & Fitrakis)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:32 AM
Original message
Will Bush cancel the 2008 election?-We may have about a year to prepare (Wasserman & Fitrakis)
Will Bush cancel the 2008 election?
Posted by moderator on August 9th, 2007
by Harvey Wasserman & Bob Fitrakis
July 30, 2007

It is time to think about the “unthinkable.”

The Bush Administration has both the inclination and the power to cancel the 2008 election.

The GOP strategy for another electoral theft in 2008 has taken clear shape, though we must assume there is much more we don’t know.

But we must also assume that if it appears to Team Bush/Cheney/Rove that the GOP will lose the 2008 election anyway (as it lost in Ohio 2006) we cannot ignore the possibility that they would simply cancel the election. Those who think this crew will quietly walk away from power are simply not paying attention.

The real question is not how or when they might do it. It’s how, realistically, we can stop them.


............

So how do we cope with the harsh realities of such a Bush/Cheney/Rove dictatorial coup?

We may have about a year to prepare. Every possible scenario needs to be discussed in excruciating detail.

For only one thing is certain: denial will do nothing.

more at:
http://www.fraudbusterbob.com/blog/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
monktonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
1. I'd just stop going to work
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
book_worm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:40 AM
Response to Original message
2. Cancelling the election may be what finally wakes this country up
Edited on Thu Aug-09-07 08:42 AM by book_worm
I think many people would take to the streets if it happened. But I don't think it will happen. I don't even think the military establishment wants Bush in there longer than his constitutional term. But I'll bookmark this just in case it does happen. Though if that happened I would think that sites like DU would probably be shut down as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:41 AM
Response to Original message
3. We Talk About The Possibility Of This Happening Here On DU - But ......
the thought never hits in MSM. If it did - it would make it harder for *Co to pull it off IMHO. They need the element of surprise and if people are talking about the prospect of this happening and more Americans are aware that *Co might try to do this - it just makes it that more difficult for *Co to engineer a cancellation.

The trick is - how do we get MSM talking about the this? How do we make more Americans aware of the fact that *Co has set the wheels in motion by Executive Orders - to make something like this happen?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
watercolors Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
4. I don't think * has the stamina for
being president much longer, I have a feeling he wants out. He will keep us in Iraq till he is gone, just so history cannot say he failed, and put it on someone else's shoulders!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Though it's a possibility, I tend to agree.
It's much easier for them to steal the next election (though we're trying to make that more difficult) than to pull off an open coup.

OTOH, if it is clear that they cannot steal it, I wouldn't put it past them to create an emergency that will 'postpone' the elections as they clamp down martial law. Then, all bets are off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cassandra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Normally I would agree but...
he keeps putting people in the government who swear loyalty to Bush personally, which creeps me out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. watercolors has the right answer
there is no way Bush will even try to suspend the election for god's sake.

don't you people have something reality based to worry about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
6. Not going to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sadie4629 Donating Member (919 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
8. I've been hearing these ominous predictions
ever since Bush was selected by the SC in 2001. It hasn't happened yet. And it won't happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. I've been hearing them since Clinton was elected the second time.
Republicans said the same thing about Clinton.

Of course, the current response to that is that Clinton didn't have the executive powers that Bush currently has.

I still don't see him doing it. I think that he'll be hellbent to get out of the White House in Jan 2009.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. they did say it about Clinton, we are sounding more like the right everyday n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
regnaD kciN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. But the difference...
Edited on Thu Aug-09-07 11:55 AM by regnaD kciN
...as Maddy pointed out, is that Clinton didn't claim "unitary executive" powers, ignore laws via "signing statements," snoop on Americans without a warrant, abolish the Posse Comitatus Act and disparage the principle of habeus corpus, deny the 4th Amendment demands probable cause (even though it's stated in the text of the Amendment!), claim the right to imprison Americans indefinitely without trial, or issue orders permitting an executive branch takeover in case of "emergency."

It's one thing to suspect an administration you don't like of wanting to establish itself as a dictatorship on the basis of nothing more than your dislike of them; it's quite another to do so in the light of action after action by that administration laying the groundwork for such a dictatorship.

Drawing an equivalence between Clinton and Bush in this matter is a little like saying that Democrats had no right to complain about the 2000 (s)election, since Republicans were likewise convinced the Democrats stole the election in 1960. It's really apples and oranges, folks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
9. 'Great' minds think alike
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
regnaD kciN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
13. While I think some concern is justified...
Edited on Thu Aug-09-07 11:41 AM by regnaD kciN
...I think the authors of this piece are mistaken in hypothesizing that this could happen "if it looks like Republicans will lose in 2008."

That assumes a one-to-one correspondence between the Republican Party and what Mike Malloy calls the "Bush Crime Family" (or what the article itself refers to as "Team Bush/Cheney/Rove") so that the latter would be satisfied to leave office as long as there's a Republican successor.

The problem is that none of the Republican candidates is a Bush family insider who would continue the pseudo-dynasty. Each would be likely to change the way things are done in ways that would cut the Bushes and their inner circle out of power. From the point of view of BushCo, is having a President Giuliani or a President Romney or a President McCain all that compelling a goal? Maybe if Jeb were running, or Condi, or if Cheney felt he had good enough health to run himself, BushCo would swing into action to tilt the election their way. But I don't think the current crop of candidates matters to them.

The upshot of this is that I think any Bush family coup, if it were to happen, would do so regardless of the likely outcome of the election. They'd snatch power to keep it away from any non-BushCo successor, Republican as well as Democrat.

Could they succeed? Overall, I tend to doubt it. While they may have jiggered the law to make such a takeover easier, it would really be dependent on two factors: the courts and the military. No matter how Bush has tilted SCOTUS, I don't think he has five votes for such a drastic step; in fact, I would even question whether all four of the currently-predictable Bush votes among the Justices would hold firm for such an action. And then there's the question of the military that would be asked to carry out such a coup. I'm not talking about the upper brass, who may have loyalties to the current administration; I'm talking about the grunts in the field and the low-level officers who are not beholden to the White House. When Soviet hardliners launched their coup against Gorbachev in August 1991, it fell apart because the average soldiers refused to fire on their own countrymen in support of the self-proclaimed junta. I can't help thinking that Bush would find the same troubles getting our military to go along with such a power-grab.

However...all of this could be off the table if the basis for such a takeover was a truly devastating terrorist attack, on a level much greater than 9/11. If there was, say, a successful nuclear attack against one or more American (likely northern and progressive, where life is cheap in the Republican view) cities that resulted in fatalities in six figures or more, all bets would be off. LIHOP II, anyone?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemGa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
14. Why? They've got what they've wanted
Their power lies in keeping the "host," the U.S. alive. This is utterly ridiculous IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
16. Will aliens land in Kansas? About as realistic!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 05:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC