The October Surprises Waiting for Obama

In five weeks, I hope look back on this column with a wry chuckle at my paranoia. If the system works, Barack Obama will take the White House. The two issues John McCain is most closely associated with - invading Iraq, and deregulating the economy - have produced history-snatching catastrophes in the eyes of 80 percent of Americans. In the first debate, McCain revealed he had nothing to say except more of the same: aggression abroad, market fundamentalist ideology at home. So why am I worried?

Obama is only a few jittery points ahead in the polls, and he has yet to face an October Surprise. This is an old term in US politics, invented when, on the eve of the 1968 election, Lyndon Johnson announced a halt to the bombing of Vietnam. It was a desperate attempt to push the Democratic nominee, Hubert Humphrey, over the finish line - and it failed. But October Surprises need not come from the opposing party. They can come from anywhere.

The first and worst would be the reappearance of Osama Bin Laden. Just five days before the 2004 election, he released a video effectively endorsing John Kerry. He told Americans to imagine corpses crying "Call to task those who have caused our death!" and said they should "return to what is right," rather than reward "the liar in the White House."

Why would he do this? Bin Laden's long-term strategy is "provoke and bait." He explains to his supporters: "We conducted a war of attrition against Russia with jihad fighters for ten years until they went bankrupt. We are continuing in the same policy - to make America bleed profusely to the point of bankruptcy." To achieve this, "all we have to do is send two mujahideen [to a remote, irrelevant area] and raise a piece of cloth on which is written 'Al Qaeda' in order to make the [US] generals race there, to cause America to suffer human, economic, and political losses."

This is his goal, in his own words - to bleed America through irrational, wildly expensive wars that will tilt thousands more fanatical young men from Islamism to full-blown jihadism. So who would you want in the White House? The guy who will wean the US off Middle Eastern oil and the wars and tyrannies it supports to get it - or his opponent? Bin Laden is a monster, but he is not an imbecile. He knows that his endorsement is a kiss of death. The man he publicly praises is the man he wants to lose. Kerry failed to expose Bin Laden's trick; Obama must do it as soon as the tape hits the air.

Beyond this, there could be November 4th surprise: the Republicans may try to steal the election. Again. They loudly claim to be concerned about voter fraud, even though a New York University study recently found that it "is more likely an individual will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls." But in the name of this paltry risk, they are effectively stripping millions of people - overwhelmingly black and Democrats - of their vote.

Their first vote-stripping tactic is to require elaborate voter I.D. that black people disproportionately lack. For example, in Indiana - a crucial swing state - Republicans have passed a law requiring voters to bring an official government document bearing their photograph to the polling station. But a study by the University of Wisconsin found that 53 percent of black adults didn't have a passport or driving license, compared to 15 percent of white people. So they can't vote unless they travel for hours (often without a car) to a sparse government registry and queue for half a day to get the correct the correct documentation. The former political director of the Texas Republican Party, Royal Masset, explains: "Requiring photo IDs could cause enough of a drop-off in legitimate Democratic voting to add 3 percent to the Republican vote."

Their second tactic is to strip the electoral rolls of black names. In almost all US states, criminals lose their vote for life. This is shocking in itself - it disenfranchises a quarter of all black men in Kentucky, for one. But many states have a sloppy process where they simply scrub anyone with the same name as a criminal off the list. So if there is a criminal called 'Chris Wayne' in a county, every black man called 'Chris Wayne' loses their vote. That's a lot of Democrats. In Florida in 2000, black voters made up 13 percent of the electorate yet they were 26 percent of the people wrongly disenfranchised.

When a judge ordered the release of the paper-work, he found out why. The team under Florida governor Jeb Bush had ordered that black criminal names had to go - but Hispanic names were not to be touched. Black Floridians overwhelmingly vote Democrat, while Hispanics lean towards the Republicans. The Bush team said this was "absolutely unintentional" and "a coincidence."

This time, the Republicans have added another group to strip from the rolls. James Carabelli, a Republican Party chairman in Michigan, says: "We have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren't voting from those addresses." These voters are supposed to register from their new addresses - but many are out of time, or too stressed to do it. So the Republicans have launched a national "voter challenge campaign" against honest people who have lost their homes. They know that 60 percent of sub-prime mortgages went to black voters, and virtually everyone who lost their home is angry with the Republicans.

If these acts of electoral sabotage go ahead on November 4th and tilt the election to McCain, Obama needs to learn from Al Gore's mistake. As the recent HBO film Recount shows, Gore was consensual and statesmanlike - in the middle of a knife-fight. He sent urbane professors to make his case, while the Republicans drummed up mobs that physically stopped the vote-counts in Palm Beach County while the clock ticked. If the need comes, Obama needs to call fraud by its real name - and fight.

I hope I'm being too cynical. I hope I'm wrong. But it would be wise fasten your seatbelts: it's going to be a bumpy month.

Johann Hari is a columnist for the Independent in London. To read a full archive of his work, click here.

To read his latest book review for the New York Times, click here.

Comments

[blaising]

I've long held that the republik party will hold 3 cards to influence the election:

1. the race card
2. the military conflict/fear card
3. the voter fraud card

At this point in the election, the race card can only be used to plant a last minute seed in the minds of voters. Maybe a couple of very nasty attack adds the day before the election, that highlight all negative things "black", will cause voters in the booth to think "Can I REALLY vote for a black man for President?"

There is still time over the next month to gin up a military conflict in any number of locations around the globe: North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, Russia/Georgia, to name a few. Any one of these is a boon to McCain.

And of course, the final card to throw down, after all else fails, is the vote fraud card. This is far and away the most frightening because the republik party has used it with great success in the past. In my mind, there is absolutely no reason to suspect they WON'T use it. They've never been spanked for it. In their collective extremist right-wing mind, it is their god's WILL that it should be so.

Trust me...the republik party is gonna' win this thing using vote fraud!!!

[Gidster]

Diebold, the voting machine company has admitted that their system is easy to hack, loses votes and in inherently inaccurate!
That sounds like voter fraud in general!

[Scorpio13]

I have actually seen a video a while back that demonstrated in an official hearing just how easy these machines can be hacked. I would not put anything past the thugs.

[alnc]

No you are not!!! You are being wise and truthful. Republicans will DO ANYTHING TO WIN!!! Lie, cheat and steal....we have seen it the last 8 years. Florida and Ohio back to back from 2000 and 2004.

If Democrats do not react to the Michigan tactics and voters hear and see how the GOP acts against CITIZENS and treats them why in Gods Name do they vote for the people that treat them like idiots.

Obama/Biden needs to beware of the tactics and nastiness that will come!!!

[dentuso]

I fear that this year's October surprise will come, if polls aren't looking like they're close enough for Republicans to simply discount enough votes, in the form of an act of war from or against Ir an.

With 60% of sub-40 voters being Democrats, a Republican loss would result in 20 years without a President from the right.

And they know that.

In effect, they have nothing to lose (other than respect from every other nation on this planet).

[RodgerLodger]

The one that puzzles me, just heard about it about 4 days ago, is the problem of foreclosure leading to change of address. From what I remember when I used to move, this requirement of keeping address current is old and was never criticized, at least widely and publicly. So if you're foreclosed, that's the cause of your moving, but changing your address is the result, and that puts one in some ordinary regulations which are sensible. For instance, you might move to a different legislative district, in which case you shouldn't be allowed to vote for the old congressman, or whoever. So how can this be attacked as illegal? Actually, one article in the NYT quoted the Rep election dude as denying they were going to use foreclosure lists. But who knows what anybody will do, and how much sympathy any voter who moved (because of foreclosure) will receive?

[vippy]

Yes, the many, many homeowners who lost their homes and the many, many workers who lost their jobs will someone be disadvantaged to vote and the GOP will be cashing in on it.
We are but a 3rd world nation when it comes to voting.

[Gidster]

We have become a third world nation period.
We have a wealthy ruling class, a wealthy corporate class, both comprising less than 5% of the population while the other 95% struggle to make ends meet to varying degrees.

[repearwo]

On the face of it you are right, but address is not a qualifying attribute to vote, just a qualifier as to where you vote. In the Presidential election all one has to do is live in the US.

The problem with purging voter roles arbitraitly is that error in voting should always be toward being able to vote rather than not being able to vote. People losing their houses in October should not be disenfranchised from voting.

These purges are conducted with the intent of disallowing certain voters from voting, that is also the problem.

My guess is however if Democrats push to get everyone (democrats and republicans) registered and gets their bvoters out to vote, the Republican shenanigans will be countered. IF Obama has a larger that 2 point lead in the vote, corruption will be ineffective. It is hard to rig anything greater than a 51 - 49 election

[WordPusher]

Part of the reason that foreclosure is not a valid reason for challenging a voter's right to cast a ballot is that many people remain in their homes for months after a foreclosure proceeding begins. Some are able to overturn the foreclosure by making up late payments; some renegotiate their debt. Just because a foreclosure has been initiated does not mean that a person has had a change of address, and it is both disingenuous and, more important, illegal for the GOP to challenge voters on that basis.

[BlueAsh]

You made some good points, although I'd like to see some hard evidence that people with names identical to criminals got their names scratched off the voters list.

Secondly, do you include petty thieves and those who fail to pay alimony in your "criminals" category? Aren't felons the only ones that lose their voting rights?

Thirdly, could it be you are worried because you know, deep in your heart, that you don't trust the current spin coming from the Democrats - no more than you trusted those from the Republicans? That, like it or not, it is going to be a close election and you can't get assurance from anywhere?

[Gidster]

Here are a few:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/dec/04/uselections2000.usa1

http://www.ktvu.com/station/15191560/detail.html

This is an ongoing issue. Do a Google search, I came up with over a million entries, the information is out there if you care to look.

[EbonBear]

It's not just names identical to criminals. In 2000, it was names that were similar to criminals or similar to aliases used by criminals if the race matched. Check either of Greg Palast's books or his work in the British "Guardian" newspaper for massive amounts of concrete evidence.

[vegangoddess]

Republicans are Darwinists, The survial of the Fittest! They don't care at all for the "workers" or " peons" or "peasants" or "slaves" or "middle class". That is all their buzzwords for the same group of people. When they say "taxpayer" they mean THEIR constituents. When I saw that Mc met with De Rothschild and Trump and Murdock had alot to say last week, I knew who had is ear and they weren't the "working class"!

[somefool]

These kinds of tactics border on fasc ism. I have to throw up now.

[Housewife]

I think Barack is up to whatever they throw at him. That's why he is going to be president. He will win by beating them.

[ellawensmom]

I agree with you. I think if we exist on in fear that the same tactics will work again this time, we are seriously underestimating Obama and Biden's tenacity. I was disappointed when Kerry conceded so soon in 2004. I don't think Obama will. I think being a teacher of consitutional law will be a strength for him, too. He'll know what to do.

[Housewife]

His greatest strengths in this will be anticipation, orginization and discipline. These guys will not be easy to outmaneuver.

[DanteLabon]

I am counting on the intelligence of the American people in November...finally. Gees..that's a stretch ain't it?? God help us all.

[HurryUp1212009]

No matter how "smart" you are, you can't vote if you are disqualified at the polls, or if your vote is tossed or lost. This is disgusting, but it's happening, across the US and run by Republicans.

[DanteLabon]

I hate to say it..but the ignorance of the American people is the ONLY thing that can keep OBAMA FROM WINNING. And never underestimate that ignorance....example 2004 election. To be fair, in 2000 Gore won. If you debate that, you are ignorant.

[Gidster]

That is the main problem with it, we can and will never actually know for sure. If Katherine Harris had put her state and her Country before her party, we may have had the truth.
Republicans cannot stand the truth. It goes against party lines.

[duchessdorleans]

"Why would he do this? Bin Laden's long-term strategy is "provoke and bait." He explains to his supporters: "We conducted a war of attrition against Russia with jihad fighters for ten years until they went bankrupt. We are continuing in the same policy - to make America bleed profusely to the point of bankruptcy." To achieve this, "all we have to do is send two mujahideen [to a remote, irrelevant area] and raise a piece of cloth on which is written 'Al Qaeda' in order to make the [US] generals race there, to cause America to suffer human, economic, and political losses."

Jimminy Christmas that's what bin Laden actually said? Why isn't anyone listening to him. I've understood for years that they are doing to us exactly what they did to Russia in Afghanistan. Well, more accurately, some country, maybe Iran, maybe even Russia, is doing to us what WE did to Russia in Afghanistan.

[SadButWiser]

This is almost what will happen. Al-Qaeda knows that the only way to 'defeat' the US is to bankrupt it. And the best way to bankrupt it is to somehow drive Americans to vote for their leaders out of fear. The question is, are Americans still scared? Another question that it is always in my mind is, why do Americans think that only a Republican president can protect them? Is it a question of the Republicans being able to brand themselves better than the Democrats? As an outside, I get the impression that the Republicans have done a good job in branding themselves as the better party to protect US interest, and the keeper of good family values. In reality, this could not be further from the truth.

[Gidster]

Americans forget mainly because Republicans keep shouting at them that the POTUS during WW1 and WW2 were both Democrats, They did a pretty good job. Carter developed the Rapid Deployment Force,
Democrats are just as good at security as Republicans, that is the same old lie that has been told since Nixon......

[dadw5boys]

KARL ROVE HAS ALREADY STOLEN THE 2008 ELECTION !!!!!!!!!!!

HERE IS HOW ! ENJOY THEN CRY FOR YOUR COUNTRY.

http://www.truthout.org/video/greg-palast-rove-has-already-fixed-2008-election

[HurryUp1212009]

Yup, disgusting...

[blastit]

Thats what I was saying count on the Reps to cheat they've been getting away with it so of course they will do it again, only this time someone need to stand up to them can you imagine all the ruckus of them trying to cheat the first African American out of the presidency,..they will never be able to live it down if the Dems fight them this time, Gore didn't fight and Kerry didn't fight its about time someone fought for us.

[jeg]

Note that a lawsuit has already been filed against the Michigan scheme, worded in such a way to start a precedent for other voter-suppression tactics.

The Obama campaign is fielding a large army of paid and volunteer attorneys to monitor and challenge voting all over the country.

I'm not saying we don't have to be vigilant, but at least we know the Obama team is aware of these tactics, and is responding appropriately-- And Sen. Obama has demonstrated that he will play within the rules, right up to and including using those rules against his opponents.

And besides... if fivethirtyeight.com is to be believed, the way things stand at the moment, we're heading for a landslide.

[vegangoddess]

I fivethirtyeight.comght.com is awesome! There are states that are now toss-up or leaning or likely Dem that weren't that close a week or two ago. Don't mess with a community organizer!!

Headline on November 5th:

SURGE OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZERS SOUNDLY TROUNCE THE GOP IN A LANDSLIDE!

Trounce = verb:
1. to beat severely; thrash.
2. to punish.
3. to defeat decisively.

[tigerakabj]

I have no doubt Obama is doing something about this. He has already done it in Michican were the rethugs have tried to strip the votes of people who's houses have been foreclosed on.

Obama saw all of this go down in Chicago and has studied past elections. In no way does he assume that these people will play fair. He always thinks 2 steps forward. He knew the repugs would do everything they could to maintain power.