(or huh?)

What's All This Then?
We're urging everyone to ask their Senators and Reps to declare their intent
NOW to object to presidential electors on Jan 6th by endorsing the declaration.

It puts states on notice that there may be a consequence to their lack of action.
Included is a demand that states take affirmative action to demonstrate that any
problems in their state have been remedied or are of negligible effect.

This puts the burden of proof back where it belongs. State officials don't simply
owe us a vote count that we can't prove was criminally generated. They owe us a
result we have confidence in. They have failed in several states to do this.

What are we accomplishing? It sounds futile. We should moveon and fight
other battles. Shouldn't we?
It's never wrong to refuse to back down on principle. To go the distance. To take
it to the mat. To hold the finish. To...to...to... oh, phplhth !!!

On a more practical level, we are creating a real consequence for the situation.
No one among the DC/Media Aristocracy wants to see such a public (in fact,
historic) confirmation that while our kids are dying for democracy in far off lands,
we can't succeed in providing a reasonable level of it here at home.

There is also the implied threat to states that refuse to provide electoral equality.
They would start thinking "hey, something might actually happen next time if we
don't clean up our act." Everyone knows they don't put up a traffic light until after
someone killed.

Getting a Senator to "sign on" now would also dial up the media attention and
therefore public awareness.

I want to work on election reform, isn't that more important than any single
election?
Sure it's more important, but not nearly as urgent. And this is an opportunity to
make a giant leap for election reform. The declaration confronts our "leaders," and
our society in general, demanding an answer to a simple question:

"Are poll-tax-lines for poor minority voters AND none for affluent, white voters a
tolerable circumstance for you, personally. In essence, are you a racist or not?"

Yes, strong stuff. But necessary stuff if we're going to secure our right to have
confidence in free and fair elections. In fact, the Declaration of Intent Project will
continue for as long as it is needed. We simply change the date!

I'm planning to go protest on Jan. 6th, isn't that just as good, or even better?
It's not a good, better, or best thing. The efforts are very different. If you haven't
yet please read this whole page. Getting them to stand up now has many benefits.
And even if we fail to get them to stand up, we still let them know how strongly we
feel out here.

And besides, wouldn't you want the protest on Jan 6th to be a celebration of our
champions standing up for our values, rather than (yet, another) rage against being
ignored (even by our own)? We'll be there and hoping to celebrate.

The Repubs will just vote down any objection. Is there any hope?
Sure, that's most likely. But....the political landscape could well change. Or even
turn on a dime, should their be some fruits from the efforts ongoing in Ohio and
elsewhere. We could end up in situation where even some Repubs are concerned
about the integrity of the election. (Yes, really.)

But even if not, we could have a situation where the public gets wise. And then you
could have "impeachment numbers." Where 70% of the country thinks (not simply
that we should moveon) but that there's treason afoot.

It's one thing for cowardly politicians to sit on their hands while someone's cronies
foist an appointed ruler on us (as opposed to an elected leader) with some legal
mumbo jumbo, smoke and mirrors. But it's quite another to face down a 70%
negative public opinion poll.

(Which is exactly what they were facing in 2000 when Frank Luntz focus-grouped the scenario of
the Florida Legislature doing the dirty work. They had no choice but to defecate on the institution of
the high court to "shut it down." History will surely judge that harshly.)

And they thought they had an image problem with Gingrich around.

Hey, this all sounds terrific! C'mon what else have you got?
Heh heh, well....we're not exactly naive idealists here.

Failure to endorse the Declaraton of Intent can certainly be made use of by any
primary opponent. And we're certainly "sending that message," if not saying it flat
out should the situation warrant. We are definitely "...takin' names."

We also see real, tangible electoral/political benefits to making even a "charge of
the light brigade" stand at this time. We still have not fully recovered from the
tragedy of the Stolen Election of 2000. Something worse than any terrorist attack.

This recent "unity" on the left that helped us prevail this time was one of
convenience mainly. It really was "anybody but bushkid" and Kerry could as easily
been a sack of cement we carried to the White House.

We think that a display of backbone is crucial to the morale of the anti-fascist
movement which includes the Dem Party as still its best vehicle for change. And
we fear the result of accepting a second blow to that unhealed wound.

Moreover, a real display of the courage of our convictions through decisive action is
something that could change the electoral landscape considerably. Many people,
particularly white males, gravitate to the other side because it is perceived as
stronger; and they respect strength.

Creating a stronger image for our side also helps to make others feel safer when
supporting us. The Gore and Kerry campaigns both identified this as an important
"message." But since their professional DC operatives stayed obsessed with
targetting the last half percent of some focussed-grouped, polled, key
demographic, they failed to see that talking the talk is NOT walking the walking.

We aim to change that on the left, with or without the "DC Dems."

Copyright 2004 thedeanpeople