Posted on 08/08/2007 8:02:53 AM PDT by SmithL
A Californian who set up a vote-swapping Web site for supporters of Ralph Nader and Al Gore in 2000, before the state shut it down with a threat of prosecution, said Tuesday he may try again next year now that a federal appeals court has ruled that online vote-trading agreements are constitutionally protected.
It all depends, Jim Cody said, on a candidacy by Nader or some other third-party hopeful that might siphon away enough votes from the Democratic nominee to tip the scales to a Republican in one or more states. His short-lived Vote Swap2000.com was meant to counteract that impact by inviting backers of Gore and Nader to agree to exchange votes.
Under the scheme, a Nader supporter in a swing state like Florida would promise to vote for Gore so that Nader's candidacy for the Green Party would not wind up benefiting the Republican, George W. Bush. In exchange, a Gore backer in a solidly Democratic state like California would vote for Nader to help the Green Party achieve the 5 percent vote support it needed for federal funding. Neither goal was met, but the venture could be revived in the future because of the court ruling.
"If there's a presidential election that's pretty tight, and a third-party candidate who's able to attract enough votes to make a difference ... I think a vote-swap Web site would be helpful," Cody said, specifying that he's interested in helping only a Democratic candidate.
Monday's ruling by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, the first appellate decision to address the issue, could also be used by a Republican who wanted to offset the effect of a third-party candidate, like Ross Perot in 1992, who drew votes from the Republican nominee.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
gee, I wonder how you could fool a vote swapping scheme.
“gee, I wonder how you could fool a vote swapping scheme.”
Sounds like a plan. Something tells me that the 9th Circus wouldn’t rule that as “free speech” though.
Hahaha...I bet you are right. That’s fraud. That’s different.
Frnch judge in the ice skating Olympics............
As much as I hate to agree with the 9th, I think thaat this is the right ruling here.
How about Michael Moore asking voters to buy “new voters” a meal? And that they should seek out people who’d vote for Kerry and not Republicans?
bookmark
That's standard practice, or at least it was Although it was usually not a meal, but rather a drink, or in some cases a hit. In some places they had to close the bars on election day to cut the practice down... I suspect it had the opposite effect, as "Voters" who would have spent the afternoon in the bar, now needed a drink even more, even enough to drag their sorry selves to the polling place. Or maybe allow themselves to be dragged to the polling place. Most of these were Democrat voters, but not quite all. It's not like they cared one way or the other.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.