A Slate piece lays out five nightmare scenarios in which the 2004 election ends up decided in the Supreme Court once again. The first four don’t bother me too much- after all, it happened in 2000, and the Republic survived- but what really concerns me is the fifth: what if there’s a terrorist attack, on Election Day, in one or more U.S. cities?
It both surprises and disturbs me that this isn’t something that’s being talked about all over the place. Suppose terrorists strike a major city on election morning- or, even worse, more than one major city, say in more than one swing state. Or what if one or both of the candidates were assassinated? Does the election go on? If so, wouldn’t the attack have disenfranchised people in the places that were attacked? And worst of all, is there any plan whatsoever in place to deal with such an emergency?
Yes, I know the Bush Administration brought up the idea of postponing the election in the event of an attack, and the reaction from the Church of I-Hate-Dubya was to fear that he was planning to declare himself Dictator For Life. But in addition to the natural worries about terrorism, we’re also facing the very real possibility of a full-blown constitutional crisis. All of which scares me a hell of a lot more than Bush/Kerry winning.
Posted by Stephen Silver at October 19, 2004 09:15 PM