The Note: Bringing It Home

"Republicans say the battle on the ground represents a test of opposing theories of how to reach voters in an era when attention spans are limited and information sources plentiful. Both sides are using a mix of paid staff and volunteers, but the GOP is far more dependent on a volunteer corps of organizers more than 1 million strong. Democrats, with ACT's help, have a more professional operation to turn out their loyalists."

"Democrats have about 250,000 volunteers, compared with 90,000 four years ago, and contest the GOP suggestion that they mainly rely on paid professionals. But Karen Hicks, national field director for the campaign at the Democratic National Committee, said Democrats have far more experienced organizers than the Republicans, noting that one county in Florida is being managed by someone who ran the entire state of Pennsylvania for Bill Clinton in 1992."

The Wall Street Journal's Cummings and Calmes do a great set-up of the Blaise Hazelwood vs. JoDee Winterhof battle tomorrow, writing that the who will win comes down to one question: "Who does the best job of turning out the vote tomorrow?" LINK

Note quiz: which of those gals provided The Note's sub-headline today?

ABC News Vote 2004: ballotwatch: legal wars:

The New York Times' Zernike and Yardley write that "elections officials say that charges of voter intimidation and voter fraud, on the street or in courtrooms, are flying more furiously than any one can remember in recent elections." LINK

Maine and Vermont allow felons to vote from jail, the New York Times Notes. LINK

The U.S. Department of Justice is sending out monitors safeguard the rights of Hispanic voters at the polls. LINK

The Washington Times notes "about 60 mainly European election observers" are getting in on the ballot watch action. LINK

E-mail your ballot watch questions, concerns, and updates to politicalunit@abcnews.com

ABC News Vote 2004: Ohio:

Breaking news from Ohio overnight:

Per the AP, "A federal judge issued an order early Monday barring political party challengers from polling places throughout Ohio during Tuesday's election. U.S. District Judge Susan Dlott found that the application of Ohio's statute allowing challengers at polling places is unconstitutional. She said the presence of challengers inexperienced in the electoral process questioning voters about their eligibility would impede voting. Dlott ruled on a lawsuit by a black Cincinnati couple who said Republican plans to deploy challengers to largely black precincts in Hamilton County was meant to intimidate and block black voters. Republicans said they wanted to prevent voter fraud."

And in a very surprising decision, ABC News' Ellen Davis reports that a federal district court judge in Akron, Ohio this morning issued an order in which he, too, struck down the Ohio challenge statute. This ruling as well as Judge Dlott's on the same issue will be appealed by Republicans this morning in the 6th circuit court.

So, again, going into Election Day in Ohio, we don't know whether challengers and poll watchers will be allowed at the polls.

Mark Niquette of the Columbus Dispatch provides an excellent primer on the court cases surrounding Ohio's statutes concerning polling site challengers. LINK

Dual registrants in Florida and Ohio: a recipe for fraud? LINK

The New York Times' James Dao on getting voters to the polls in Ohio. LINK

Page
null
Join the Discussion
You are using an outdated version of Internet Explorer. Please click here to upgrade your browser in order to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
You Might Also Like...