The 2004 election-- not THAT stolen
Over at Salon, Farhad Manjoo argues against Robert Kennedy's Rolling Stone article on Ohio 2004. More specifically, he argues that shifty Republican machinations weren't enough to throw the election to Bush. And he makes some good points. Kennedy's article did suggest a pattern of fraud so widespread-- that would've involved so many people-- it would've been impossible to maintain the entire cabal in silence.
At the same time, Manjoo's arguments can be underwhelming. And in one instance, simply embarrassing:
Listen to the chairman of the board of Franklin's election office, an African-American man named William Anthony, who also headed the county's Democratic Party. As I first pointed out in my review of "Fooled Again," any effort to deliberately skew the vote toward Bush in Franklin would have had to involve Anthony -- and he has rejected the charge that he'd do such a thing. "I am a black man. Why would I sit there and disenfranchise voters in my own community?" Anthony told the Columbus Dispatch. "I've fought my whole life for people's right to vote."
This is proof? Kenneth Blackwell is black, and Zell Miller is a Democrat, but they clearly don't work on behalf of race or party, respectively. How about Texas' Henry Cuellar, a Hispanic Democrat further to the right than many Republicans? He isn't really supporting policies that do much for 'Latin uplift.' Manjoo may be exactly right, but as written this hardly constitutes evidence. I'm willing to chalk it up to sloppiness, but that's what he's accusing Kennedy of. To be fair, his larger point here is that the disparity in voting machines was inevitable in minority districts-- due to incompetence. Which still made for an unfair election, right?
The article does convincingly demonstrate that Kennedy's numbers were off, or used estimates more favorable to his argument. The uncomfortable conclusion I draw is that we'll probably never know the true extent of the shenanigans in Ohio. And that it's distressingly easy to tamper with elections with little fear of consequences. That's bad news no matter who's article is more accurate.
UPDATE: Greg Palast just wrote a brief essay on the national implications of the various tricks and tools of voter suppression: under/overvotes, provisional ballots, absentee ballots and purges.
At the same time, Manjoo's arguments can be underwhelming. And in one instance, simply embarrassing:
Listen to the chairman of the board of Franklin's election office, an African-American man named William Anthony, who also headed the county's Democratic Party. As I first pointed out in my review of "Fooled Again," any effort to deliberately skew the vote toward Bush in Franklin would have had to involve Anthony -- and he has rejected the charge that he'd do such a thing. "I am a black man. Why would I sit there and disenfranchise voters in my own community?" Anthony told the Columbus Dispatch. "I've fought my whole life for people's right to vote."
This is proof? Kenneth Blackwell is black, and Zell Miller is a Democrat, but they clearly don't work on behalf of race or party, respectively. How about Texas' Henry Cuellar, a Hispanic Democrat further to the right than many Republicans? He isn't really supporting policies that do much for 'Latin uplift.' Manjoo may be exactly right, but as written this hardly constitutes evidence. I'm willing to chalk it up to sloppiness, but that's what he's accusing Kennedy of. To be fair, his larger point here is that the disparity in voting machines was inevitable in minority districts-- due to incompetence. Which still made for an unfair election, right?
The article does convincingly demonstrate that Kennedy's numbers were off, or used estimates more favorable to his argument. The uncomfortable conclusion I draw is that we'll probably never know the true extent of the shenanigans in Ohio. And that it's distressingly easy to tamper with elections with little fear of consequences. That's bad news no matter who's article is more accurate.
UPDATE: Greg Palast just wrote a brief essay on the national implications of the various tricks and tools of voter suppression: under/overvotes, provisional ballots, absentee ballots and purges.
posted by Matt Sandwich | 9:12 AM
<< Home