We Win Or You Cheated
Michael Graham points out that line of reasoning being spoken openly by Robert Kuttner in the Boston Globe. It's the kind of logic that has been building in the press lately.
That's liberal Robert Kuttner's claim in today's Boston Globe-Democrat, offered without irony (Democrats are, after all, the "vote early and often" party).
"[U]nless there are levels of theft and fraud that would truly mean the end of American democracy, a Democratic House seems as close to a sure thing as we ever get in American politics three days before an election… November 2006 will be remembered either as the time American democracy was stolen again, maybe forever, or began a brighter day. "
Last week, Democrats were complaining that black voters weren't going to turn out because they're assuming the elections are rigged, anyway. Now the dopes at the NYTimes-Boston Bureau tell them they're probably right. Brilliant.
I am trying to figure out what is more breath-taking–Kuttner's arrogance ("Of course we've already won this election! We shouldn't even allow the actual voting, that can only screw things up.") or his unfounded insults against his political opponents ("the only way the GOP–who've won 7 of the last 10 presidential elections–can win is by cheating!")
This has been something I have been worried about all along. That this is exactly what will happen if the conventional wisdom turns out to be completely wrong. Remember that the CW was that Bush was toast in 2004. Certain elements have been making accusations ever since.
By doug, Saturday, 4 November , 2006 @ 2:30 pm
This explanation of electronic voting should comfort Kuttner.
By Quilly Mammoth, Saturday, 4 November , 2006 @ 2:47 pm
Don’t forget that Clinton had Brad DeLong study “voting by statistical probablity”. That research was used by DeLong in testimony in the 2000 Florida debacle.
The dems _seriously_ think that stuff is as accurate as an actual vote.
By crosspatch, Saturday, 4 November , 2006 @ 3:12 pm
The Democrats simply can not accept that the Republicans aren’t as unpopular as they think should be the case. Explaining to them that Bush took 98 of the 100 fastest growing counties in the US and that the Democratic strongholds such as the Northeast and upper midwest are losing overall influence and that the South is changing rapidly from blue to red country doesn’t seem to have any impact. They simply stick their fingers in their ears and keep repeating the “you cheated” mantra. They are acting in a very juvenile manner. The more time that goes by the more I am seriously believing that the Democrats are becoming the party of people with serious emotional and behavioral health problems.
Now the Democrats are starting to hemmorage the black vote, next it will be the latino vote and they will still be standing there with their fingers in their ears and blinders on refusing to see that they have become irrelevant.
By crosspatch, Saturday, 4 November , 2006 @ 3:31 pm
One thing that would help. If pollsters want a more accurate view of an election, then they need to sample an accurate cross section of the country. In the 2004 elections the electorate was 37% Dem, 37% Rep, and 26% “other”. Rasmussen for example, tries to get an even split of 50% D and 50% R but that does not reflect the numbers that actually go to the polls to vote meaning their polls are meaningless. Their polls tell you how 74% of the electorate is going to vote and leaves an automatic 26% potential margin for error when extrapolated to the general electorate.
Until pollsters start including numbers of non-Dem and non-Rep voters that actually reflect the group that votes, their polls are silly.
By mokus, Saturday, 4 November , 2006 @ 4:14 pm
Read about Oaxaca, and imagine the same sort of Left-wing temper tantrum in Berkeley, California, or Portland, Oregon, or even in Boston, New York, or Washington DC.
Perhaps even in several places at once, encouraged by extremist elements in the Drive by Media, visuals provided by Hollywood, and financed by Ted Turner and George Soros.
The Left knows the American people will never vote them into office again, not after the way they’ve behaved during the last 6 years.
I wish it wasn’t so, but does anyone really think the Democrat Party here isn’t capable of it?
By Gaius, Saturday, 4 November , 2006 @ 4:27 pm
If that were to happen, I rather suspect it would be the end of the Democrats as an electable party. Period. Americans as a rule do not like sore losers.
By Quilly Mammoth, Saturday, 4 November , 2006 @ 7:18 pm
America has a two big reasons that riots and takeovers like happened in Mexico won’t happen here. We have a competent National Guard and we have the Second Amendment.
Bezerkly might _think_ it is an Autonomous University, immune by law from outside interferance…as is the university in Oaxaca…but it isn’t.