« Best fundraising thermometer ever | Main | NYT reporter pushes anti-Pelosi GOP spin »

October 28, 2006

Comments

While I can agree things may be getting more shrill, to say there is no credible evidence of Ken Blackwell working towards 'stealing the vote' is somewhat ignorant. The republicans seem to be following the ideal of 'a trifle makes perfection' in reducing black votes. Moving machines out of black districts and such. While the Conyer's report is certainly partisan, that does not mean it is factually wrong.

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1012):

I would also suggest that since republicans are putting character forward as a major issue then perhaps divorce and how it unfolded certainly does go towards character and is relevant.

I find it strange that you split hairs about others' writing, but you yourself have no factual basis for your own interpretation.

Marshall could have meant Lynne Cheney's personal fantasies, as you allude, or he could have meant her created fantasies, i.e from her novel. One could easily choose to interpret Marshall's words dissing the novel as a bodice ripping romance paperback. Or he could even have deliberately chosen the word "fantasy" so that he could say something salacious and hide behind the other interpretation of the word. The point is we don't know.

So is your interpretation of Marshall your gut feeling, or is it based on some other fact that your aren't blogging about?

I find it odd that you seem to be approaching JMM as if he were a non-partisan journalist, when he's openly a partisan.

The theft of the 2004 election is a well-established fact. You should try to become better informed on subjects before commenting on them.

Well, it's Saturday, and that's "Gratuitously bash a liberal with stretched arguments to show my centrism" day in the Nyhan calendar.

blackwell's actions are numerous and well-documented, particularly regarding his pre-election voting roll purges. and that lesbian fantasies argument is one of the silliest you've made recently.

just face it. republicans are worse. there is no false equivalence. you're being a "useful idiot" to the side that harms.

by all means though, if liberals do something stupid or dishonest, say so. no criticism there. but ridiculous crap like this discredits you.

Marshall could have meant Lynne Cheney's personal fantasies, as you allude, or he could have meant her created fantasies, i.e from her novel. One could easily choose to interpret Marshall's words dissing the novel as a bodice ripping romance paperback. Or he could even have deliberately chosen the word "fantasy" so that he could say something salacious and hide behind the other interpretation of the word. The point is we don't know.

Don't take it bad, Sean, but you're the one splitting hairs here. Whatever Marshall may have meant (assuming he meant something else or deeper than what he wrote) is irrelevant. The only thing that counts is what is on the page. And what is on the page leads at first sight to only one explanation.

Don't take it bad, Sean, but you're the one splitting hairs here. Whatever Marshall may have meant (assuming he meant something else or deeper than what he wrote) is irrelevant. The only thing that counts is what is on the page. And what is on the page leads at first sight to only one explanation.

Leads to one explanation....because you say so? Brendan has problems with the word "fantasies" because it can't be confirmed as fact. But because "everybody knows what Josh Marshall meant", I guess I was wrong.

Some logic.

"there's no credible evidence to support the insinuation that the election was stolen."

There is a mountain of credible evidence that prove that the election was stolen. To state that no evidence exists is to clearly and overtly state that you are entirely comfortable ignoring the matter, and yet happy to talk about the subject as if you were informed about it. You also suggest that your readers do the same.

One cannot call such a message reality driven. You had best hit the books on this matter.

If you disagree, then I would suggest that you provide your readers reference to the "credible" sources for your statement. I can provide my sources.

Sorry Brendan but the election of 2004 is not going to go before a jury and get a verdict of "guilty" before reasonable people can say it was stolen, based on the evidence.

You say there is no credible evidence the vote was stolen begging the question, "What happened to Brendan Nyhan.". Since when is irrefutable fact not credible evidence. Less voting machines were sent to democratic districts than to republican. Even if you would like to ascribe that to negligence and not willful intent to steal, the result is the same. Democratic voters turned away from voting by too long waits.

I will not explain to you all of what went on as it would take too long and if you have not figured it out by now willful ignorance would be the most likely explaination. All it takes is googling "2004 stolen election ohio" and the first result is Kennedy's Rolling Stone article that spells it out to anyone who cares. Just to quote one paragraph talking about Ohio;

" Officials there purged tens of thousands of elegible voters from the rolls, neglected to process registration cards generated by democratic voter drives, shortchanged democratic precincts when they allocated voting machines and illegaly derailed a recount that could have given Kerry the presidency. A precinct in a an evangelical church in Miami County recorded an impossibly high turnout of ninty-eight percent, while a polling place in inner-city Cleveland recorded an equally impossible turnout of only seven percent. In Warren County, GOP election officials even invented a nonexistent terrorist threat to bar the media from monitoring the official vote count." The article goes on to back up the evidence.

It seems to me when Brendan says there is no credible evidence he is either too lazy to investigate the issue, does not care, is not able to believe for some reason that a U.S. presidential election could be stolen, or is knowingly lying. I don't know what happened to Brandan or why he says what he says in the face of the evidence but he is just wrong.

On a lesser note, I agree with the previous commentors who say this post is a petty attempt to show balance by finding something wrong with the democrats and the left. Done at a time when the right is pulling out all the stops in sleaze, Limbaugh mocking MJFox, Fox news constant harping that a win for the dems is a win for al Queda, Republican race-baiting ads with african drums for black candidates and outright lies about candidates calling phone sex numbers, not to mention the extreem rhetoric from the right wing blogs like LGF, Free Republic, Malkin, Patterico's Pontifications, Shot in the Dark, and many others, rhetoric that mahes Josh Marshall look like mother Teresa, this post is just way off the mark. Yes critize the left when they do wrong but dont be so desperate to do it that you pick on relatively unimportant natter.

Remember Lynn Cheney was in there defending her husband for saying using water boarding on detainees was a no-brainer. Keep your eye on the ball. The congress is passing laws now to enable the president to use the military against U.S. civilians. Add that to all the other powers the president has been hoarding for himself and do you really think the right wing is going to let a Democrat or liberal become president. Come on. They are going to try their best to steal the next election and words like Brandan's in his post above are music to their ears.

Brendan, this is politics. Allen made a slimy, substanceless attack that might actually swing the election his way. The Dems have to hit back, and I have no problems with using Allen's divorce records to do so. Time and again the Republicans win elections by being unafraid to get their hands dirty, and they're not going to stop. It's unfortunate, but Dems have to play the game that way or else they're going to keep losing.

What I want to know is what if Brendan talking about in the previous "thermometer" piece?

What's going on?

If people think they can prove the 2004 election was stolen, they should tell the Democratic Party. Let me again quote the Washington Post:

Democratic Party officials charged yesterday that the election system in Ohio broke down in last year's presidential race, citing numerous problems that frustrated or disenfranchised voters while concluding there was no evidence of fraud in the outcome.

As for the Cheney quote, I think a post that refers to "her lesbian fantasies" contains a pretty clear suggestion that they are personal.

Well, to back up Sean, again you are saying that YOU think "her lesbian fantasies" meant her personal lesbian fantasties. That's your reaction to the phrase, not mine, and apparently Sean's.

"If people think they can prove the 2004 election was stolen, they should tell the Democratic Party. Let me again quote the Washington Post

Does intentionally depressing the black vote mean the election was "stolen"? Does intentionally shipping far too few voting machines to Democratic precincts to create long delays and significant walkaways, while making sure there are enough machines in Republican precincts to have no delays constitute a "stolen" election?

I think JMM's rhetoric is perfectly acceptable, if admittedly partisan.

When he starts saying the RFK Jr Rolling Stone article is largely true, I'll join you in your concern.

Sorry for the sandbagging you are getting for this Brendan, and I don't mean to add to the fray (I had written this comment before even seeing these other replies), but I have a word or two to contribute as well.

Saying that none of this has been "proven" is similar to saying no figures of authority have ever been found guilty of wrongdoing with the Abu Ghraib incident (or take your pick on any number of incidents like this that have occurred in the past several years). In our political context, the fact that courtroom-affirmed guilt wasn't categorically and undeniably found doesn't mean as much as it ideally should or ought to.

On the "helped steal"...

Marshall was only mentioning it as an (admittedly partisan) side note he likely thought up on the spot, and his point was instead about Blackwell's pedophile remarks.

Thus, faults against him for how he speaks of Blackwell's wrongdoing with regards to Ohio can't mean as much as if that were point of his post. I bet if it were and he had some long winded conclusive essay, he would have taken more time to insulate himself from the kind of scrutiny we're giving him. If not, I'd be asking "What Happened to Joshua Micah Marshall?"

But as it stands I see a molehill among mountains, and am not asking that question.

The thing is that Nyhan doesn't even really care about this. He read it and thought, "hmm, here's a chance for me to show nonpartisan street cred."

if you are sincerely concerned, then write it. I'm not asking for blind loyalty, just authenticity. there's no way that this post churned up enough outrage in you to justify a post. you were reaching just so you can have an anti-democratic vote to give credibility to your anti-republican post.

the thing that keeps you from being great is your all-consuming fear of being seen as a hack

As for the Cheney quote, I think a post that refers to "her lesbian fantasies" contains a pretty clear suggestion that they are personal.

Actually, Sean made clear why it is not clear.

News flash to Brendan, The Democratic Party leadership are a bunch of mamby, pambys who are afraid of their own shadow. The fact that they say there was no evidence of fraud prooves one thing only, they are afraid to fight. After all their rolling over to Bush's radical agenda over the last six years for fear of being called weak on defense or coddling terrorists it is sad that I still have to point this out to people who should know better.

It is one thing to claim that the election was not stolen as you did in your post, but to now take a quote from the Democratic leadership to say that there was no fraud is beyond rediculous. It is like burying your head in the sand and saying the sun is not bright, my friend here who has his head in the sand says the sun is not bright also so there, that proves it.

Anybody who has any questions on Ohio and the 2004 election just read Kennedy's Rolling Stone article then see how the claims of "No fraud" stand up.

If you think something negative has happened to Marshall for saying Blackwell stole the election I would love to see you debate him on it and try and make your case that there was no fraud. This is too important an issue to just be bandied about as an aside and then dismissed out of hand.

Leads to one explanation....because you say so?

No. Because that's how it reads.

Petey,

"When he starts saying the RFK Jr Rolling Stone article is largely true, I'll join you in your concern."

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. May you please elaborate?

Leads to one explanation....because you say so?

No. Because that's how it reads.

No that's not how it reads. People write fantasies, and therefore must imagine them at least once. It's both a use of a word's ambiguity and its literal meaning to write what Josh did, nothing more or less. Josh didn't literally "push slime" either, yet we don't hold Brendan to a literal standard, we know what he meant even if he's wrong.

"I'm not sure I understand what you mean. May you please elaborate?"

The RFK jr piece includes quite a few things that have been rather conclusively disproved. It's extremely shoddy work. And I say that as someone who is comfortable with saying that Blackwell helped steal Ohio for Bush in '04.

If JMM were endorsing the RFK jr piece, Brendan would have a far more valid point than he actually does here.

The comments to this entry are closed.