Re: The Left Promotes Assertions That Turn Out to Be False

In article <18us8qvyfkf3w$.p53wzg4wf24v.dlg@xxxxxxxxxx>, voter1
@gmail.com says...
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 04:48:26 -0400, Pookie wrote:

June 11, 2006
The Left Promotes Assertions That Turn Out to Be False
By John Leo


Here is the article by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
http://tinyurl.com/ogrhq

Check it out.

You don't have to read it if it frightens you that much, but at least note
that he uses footnotes and cites his references, making for a very powerful
argument.

Try the Kennedy article and see for yourself.

The Kennedy piece is laughable. Which is why it appears in
Rolling Stone rather than a credible news source which would have fact
checkers and reputations to uphold. Much of the piece is silly and
deserves no response such as some hotel worker overhearing some phone
call of some other unnamed person who was calling to intimidate felons.
This all sounds like the 2000 Florida whining that millions (then it was
thousands) of voters were intimidated by police and evil Republicans but
then when hearings were held, none could be found.

The first indication that something was gravely amiss on November 2nd,
2004, was the inexplicable discrepancies between exit polls and actual
vote counts. Polls in thirty states weren't just off the mark -- they
deviated to an extent that cannot be accounted for by their margin of
error. In all but four states, the discrepancy favored President Bush.

Over the past decades, exit polling has evolved into an exact science.

Wow, how unbelieveably wrong. An "exact science", LOL! Polls are wrong
ALL THE TIME and exit polling is especially hard to do. Like any poll,
you don't talk to everyone but even worse here, you don't poll at every
precinct. All precints are not equal. Some are heavily democrat, some
are heavily republican, some are closer to even and the mix changes over
time. Its very difficult to know which ones to include, and just as
important, which to exclude and how to weight the ones you are
including. It would be very easy to get almost any result. Also, the
exit polls showed Kerry leading early in the day which is another flaw
of exit polls -- the people who vote early may be a different political
mix than those who vote after work just as certain kinds of people will
wish to not participate in exit polls. Much of this article is an
inability to get past the wrong exit polls even though they have been
adequately explained many times over.

But during the summer of 2004, the GOP targeted minority voters in
Ohio by zip code, sending registered letters to more than 200,000
newly registered voters(64) in sixty-five counties.(65) On October
22nd, a mere eleven days before the election, Ohio Republican Party
Chairman Bob Bennett -- who also chairs the board of elections in
Cuyahoga County -- sought to invalidate the registrations of 35,427
voters who had refused to sign for the letters or whose mail came back
as undeliverable.(66) Almost half of the challenged voters were from
Democratic strongholds in and around Cleveland.(67)
and around Cleveland.(67)

"almost half"?? LOL! So the majority of those challenged were non-
democrats! This is getting silly and desperate.

Another way Ohio "rigged" the election, according to this piece, is by
requiring people to vote in their precinct. This is a reasonable rule
that exists throughout the country for very obvious reasons.

The decision left hundreds of thousands of voters in predominantly
Democratic counties to navigate the state's bewildering array of
11,366 precincts

Hilarious. Why do democrats continually find the voting process so
difficult to understand? In 2000, they were "bewildered" by the
butterfly ballot (which was designed by democrats by the way). Now,
they are "bewildered" about which precinct to go to and its all those
wascally republican's fault!! Democrats want to be able to show up at
any precinct at all and vote (even in a different state -- hey why not,
this is a democracy dag gummit!) and further they don't want to be
required to show an ID. LOL! Its beyond absurd. Cynical republicans
think they want these things because democrats know it will increase
voter fraud (ineligble people voting and people voting many times) and
that the democrats think they will benefit from more voter fraud. I
won't comment on that theory but I will agree that the current rules of
voting in your precinct (where your name can practically be checked off)
and with an ID is a very reasonable way to conduct an election and guard
against fraud.

There is much whining in the piece about long lines. This is more
crybaby stuff that a serious news organization would be embarassed to
print. Studies after the election showed that lines really weren't
longer on average in the more democrat precincts. And people crying
about a long line to vote (a vote that happens only one day every 4
years) should look at the people of Iraq who not only waited in long
lines but who braved quite real death threats to cast their vote. Their
voter turnout percentage put ours to shame.

The rest of the piece deals with some faulty voting machines found here
and there. The flaw of course is that Kennedy only looked for them in
democrat precincts. Of course there will be some issues at every
precinct but he only reported the ones in democrat areas. If all the
precincts were put to this much scrutiny, the problems tend to balance
out. But this is not a serious piece and Kennedy made no attempt to do
that. Nothing he cites comes close to turning around the 120,000 vote
lead that President Bush achieved.

See also: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/

John Black
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: There is no doubt, Bush was never elected president, he was installed
    ... Maybe when the exit polls show a 10% or 20% win for the democratic ... vote counts. ... requiring people to vote in their precinct. ... Why do democrats continually find the voting process so ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Re: There is no doubt, Bush was never elected president, he was installed
    ... Maybe when the exit polls show a 10% or 20% win for the democratic ... vote counts. ... requiring people to vote in their precinct. ... Why do democrats continually find the voting process so ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Re: Completely OT - political phone calls
    ... precinct has the new receiptless touch screens. ... Also, our "booths" are ... I really hope that Democrats gain enough ground to at least stick their ... It made me ill to vote for an anti-choice candidate, ...
    (rec.pets.dogs.behavior)
  • Re: The people have spoken
    ... According to exit polls, it wasn't that the ... Democrats won so much as the Republicans lost. ... the Republicans and refused to vote for them, ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
  • Re: Liberal NYT Prepares Democrats for LOsses
    ... For Democrats, Even a Gain May Feel Like a Failure ... picking up, say, 14 seats in the House and five seats in the Senate could ... 2008 presidential election cycle. ... Election Experts Believe Exit Polls Give An Edge And Sway Towards ...
    (alt.politics.bush)