T Nation

Angry, Bitter Losers...

Not Kerry, or Edwards, but a lot of their backers are coming off this way. Kerry, definitely, and Edwards a little less so, definitely came off as very classy in their concession.

From some of the posters here to columnists to people interviewed in the NYT – what happened to all the advocates of listening to the people? Aside from throwing insults at all the Bush voters, some people are actively wishing for harm to come to the country to repudiate the Bush election. I know people get upset with their patriotism is questioned, but pardon me if I observe it’s just a bit unpatriotic to insult the majority of the citizens of a country and wish it to fall in a recession and suffer massive terrorist attacks.

I’m going to post some examples of angry, bitter losers on here – I suppose any other angry, bitter losers can post their thoughts as well.

After that, I welcome discussion of how Bush can be a “uniter” of the country if people are going to take these sorts of attitudes? How can he govern according to the wishes of the people who actually elected him and still be a uniter?

At Belgravia Dispatch they note that the Daily Kos, a liberal blog, is looking forward to possible debacles in Iraq:


They Don’t Get It

So I went over to Kos today–a blog I rarely visit–to get a sense of the mood over at an “activist” Democrat blog. Truly, my intention was not a spot of schadenfreude. I was merely curious to get a bit of the pulse. Solidarity and regrouping for the next battle? Internecine recriminations? Shock? Anger? A ‘shucks’, let’s try again next time, vibe? Well, not really. Something altogether more alarming. Kos calls the “big silver lining” re: Bush’s victory that America will lose the Iraq war on Bush’s watch. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/4/142458/451

They don’t get it, do they? Such fifth-column-like talk is a big reason why they lost this election. Because broad, centrist swaths of the American polity find such rhetoric noxious, irresponsible, morally defunct, defeatist, lazy and indulgent. This abject abdication of American responsibility on the global stage–arrived at through such a myopic, provincial lens–is a pity, I guess. But, then again, this Moore-inization of the Democratic party’s younger, activist base–including the increasing fusion of political thought with ‘entertainment’ (read: crude, imbecilic popular culture offerings–whether pseudo-documentaries a la Moore or risibly parodic P. Diddy-esque “political” activism and such)–does have, er, a “silver lining” of sorts. At least if you are a card-carrying Republican. It’s that the Democrats won’t be able to turn their electoral disadvantage around in either of the '06 midterms or '08 Presidential–certainly not if their strategy is to root for defeat in Iraq! It’s not only morally despicable, of course, for Iraq, for us, for our soldiers, for all the Iraqi citizens who don’t wish to trade the previous Baathist thuggery for the cruel yoke of Islamic fundamentalism, say. It’s also just plain dumb on a tactical level.

People like John Podesta are going to need to exert leadership to try to steer misguided people (like those hanging their hat over at Kos’) back towards a centrist re-jiggering of the “values” debate–ie, turn the talk away from gays, guns, and God (issues they appear to be losing) to talk of human dignity, economic progress, human rights writ large. It will be hard; but that’s at least a possible way forward that warrants investigation–especially if married to a highly charismatic leader (rather than a wooden, if distinguished, senator). Instead though, and sadly, this crowd appears to care little about human rights–at least per such hugely irresponsible cheerleading of an American defeat in Iraq. That country is currently the critical theater to spearhead democratization in a region which needs it so desparately. What folly to root for a defeat there! And what idiocy too!

Finally, of course, such flippant treatment of a major national security issue is also very small; and the American people have smelled this smallness out. That’s part of the reason a somewhat embattled American president, with a less than ideal economy and with a tough war on his hands, was handily re-elected (I believe not since FDR has a President been re-elected while simultaneously gaining seats for his party in both Houses of Congress). Americans like to dream of big projects and goals–and the Democratic party is failing them in this–content instead to lazily carp from the sidelines. Worse, some of that parties activists, it too often appears, would wish for some important, declared national objectives to be scuttled. Trust me, that wasn’t a winning strategy in the past, it isn’t one right now, and it won’t be one in the future.

More on all this soon.

James Wolcott of Vanity Fair offers this gem:



“Should Bush win, I shall post a statement of philosophical resignation tentatively titled “Good, Go Ahead, America, Choke on Your Own Vomit, You Deserve to Die.” The latter will probably require a little more tweaking.”

Probably just a touch more tweaking…

Richard Cohen’s not that bad – he just wants a recession:


“From a Democratic perspective, what this country needs is a good recession. Barring that, the party needs a candidate who can be comfy talking religion and, once that’s established, go on to talk about other things.”


How about prozac in the water?

Check out this (perhaps anti-psychotics are in order):

Kerry Won.
Here are the Facts.
excerpted from TomPaine.com
Thursday, November 4, 2004
by Greg Palast


Bush won Ohio by 136,483 votes. Typically in the United States, about 3 percent of votes cast are voided?known as ?spoilage? in election jargon?because the ballots cast are inconclusive. Drawing on what happened in Florida and studies of elections past, Palast argues that if Ohio?s discarded ballots were counted, Kerry would have won the state. Today, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports there are a total of 247,672 votes not counted in Ohio, if you add the 92,672 discarded votes plus the 155,000 provisional ballots. So far there’s no indication that Palast’s hypothesis will be tested because only the provisional ballots are being counted.

Kerry won. Here’s the facts.

I know you don’t want to hear it. You can’t face one more hung chad. But I don’t have a choice. As a journalist examining that messy sausage called American democracy, it’s my job to tell you who got the most votes in the deciding states. Tuesday, in Ohio and New Mexico, it was John Kerry.

Most voters in Ohio thought they were voting for Kerry. CNN’s exit poll showed Kerry beating Bush among Ohio women by 53 percent to 47 percent. Kerry also defeated Bush among Ohio’s male voters 51 percent to 49 percent. Unless a third gender voted in Ohio, Kerry took the state.

So what’s going on here? Answer: the exit polls are accurate. Pollsters ask, “Who did you vote for?” Unfortunately, they don’t ask the crucial, question, “Was your vote counted?” The voters don’t know.

Here’s why. Although the exit polls show that most voters in Ohio punched cards for Kerry-Edwards, thousands of these votes were simply not recorded. This was predictable and it was predicted. [See TomPaine.com, “An Election Spoiled Rotten,” November 1.]

Once again, at the heart of the Ohio uncounted vote game are, I’m sorry to report, hanging chads and pregnant chads, plus some other ballot tricks old and new.

The election in Ohio was not decided by the voters but by something called “spoilage.” Typically in the United States, about 3 percent of the vote is voided, just thrown away, not recorded. When the bobble-head boobs on the tube tell you Ohio or any state was won by 51 percent to 49 percent, don’t you believe it … it has never happened in the United States, because the total never reaches a neat 100 percent. The television totals simply subtract out the spoiled vote.

Whose Votes Are Discarded?

And not all votes spoil equally. Most of those votes, say every official report, come from African-American and minority precincts. (To learn more, click here.)

We saw this in Florida in 2000. Exit polls showed Gore with a plurality of at least 50,000, but it didn’t match the official count. That’s because the official, Secretary of State Katherine Harris, excluded 179,855 spoiled votes. In Florida, as in Ohio, most of these votes lost were cast on punch cards where the hole wasn’t punched through completely?leaving a ‘hanging chad,’?or was punched extra times. Whose cards were discarded? Expert statisticians investigating spoilage for the government calculated that 54 percent of the ballots thrown in the dumpster were cast by black folks. (To read the report from the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, click here.)

And here’s the key: Florida is terribly typical. The majority of ballots thrown out (there will be nearly 2 million tossed out from Tuesday’s election) will have been cast by African American and other minority citizens.

So here we go again. Or, here we don’t go again. Because unlike last time, Democrats aren’t even asking Ohio to count these cards with the not-quite-punched holes (called “undervotes” in the voting biz). Nor are they demanding we look at the “overvotes” where voter intent may be discerned.

Ohio is one of the last states in America to still use the vote-spoiling punch-card machines. And the Secretary of State of Ohio, J. Kenneth Blackwell, wrote before the election, ?the possibility of a close election with punch cards as the state?s primary voting device invites a Florida-like calamity.?

But this week, Blackwell, a rabidly partisan Republican, has warmed up to the result of sticking with machines that have a habit of eating Democratic votes. When asked if he feared being this year’s Katherine Harris, Blackwell noted that Ms. Fix-it’s efforts landed her a seat in Congress.

Exactly how many votes were lost to spoilage this time? Blackwell’s office, notably, won’t say, though the law requires it be reported. Hmm. But we know that last time, the total of Ohio votes discarded reached a democracy-damaging 1.96 percent. The machines produced their typical loss?that’s 110,000 votes?overwhelmingly Democratic.

The Impact Of Challenges

First and foremost, Kerry was had by chads. But the Democrat wasn’t punched out by punch cards alone. There were also the ‘challenges.’ That’s a polite word for the Republican Party of Ohio’s use of an old Ku Klux Klan technique: the attempt to block thousands of voters of color at the polls. In Ohio, Wisconsin and Florida, the GOP laid plans for poll workers to ambush citizens under arcane laws?almost never used?allowing party-designated poll watchers to finger individual voters and demand they be denied a ballot. The Ohio courts were horrified and federal law prohibits targeting of voters where race is a factor in the challenge. But our Supreme Court was prepared to let Republicans stand in the voting booth door.

In the end, the challenges were not overwhelming, but they were there. Many apparently resulted in voters getting these funky “provisional” ballots?a kind of voting placebo?which may or may not be counted. Blackwell estimates there were 175,000; Democrats say 250,000. Pick your number. But as challenges were aimed at minorities, no one doubts these are, again, overwhelmingly Democratic. Count them up, add in the spoiled punch cards (easy to tally with the human eye in a recount), and the totals begin to match the exit polls; and, golly, you’ve got yourself a new president. Remember, Bush won by 136,483 votes in Ohio.

Enchanted State’s Enchanted Vote

Now, on to New Mexico, where a Kerry plurality?if all votes are counted?is more obvious still. Before the election, in TomPaine.com, I wrote, “John Kerry is down by several thousand votes in New Mexico, though not one ballot has yet been counted.”

How did that happen? It’s the spoilage, stupid; and the provisional ballots.

CNN said George Bush took New Mexico by 11,620 votes. Again, the network total added up to that miraculous, and non-existent, ‘100 percent’ of ballots cast.

New Mexico reported in the last race a spoilage rate of 2.68 percent, votes lost almost entirely in Hispanic, Native American and poor precincts?Democratic turf. From Tuesday’s vote, assuming the same ballot-loss rate, we can expect to see 18,000 ballots in the spoilage bin.

Spoilage has a very Democratic look in New Mexico. Hispanic voters in the Enchanted State, who voted more than two to one for Kerry, are five times as likely to have their vote spoil as a white voter. Counting these uncounted votes would easily overtake the Bush ‘plurality.’

Already, the election-bending effects of spoilage are popping up in the election stats, exactly where we’d expect them: in heavily Hispanic areas controlled by Republican elections officials. Chaves County, in the “Little Texas” area of New Mexico, has a 44 percent Hispanic population, plus African Americans and Native Americans, yet George Bush “won” there 68 percent to 31 percent.

I spoke with Chaves’ Republican county clerk before the election, and he told me that this huge spoilage rate among Hispanics simply indicated that such people simply can’t make up their minds on the choice of candidate for president. Oddly, these brown people drive across the desert to register their indecision in a voting booth.

Now, let’s add in the effect on the New Mexico tally of provisional ballots.

“They were handing them out like candy,” Albuquerque journalist Renee Blake reported of provisional ballots. About 20,000 were given out. Who got them?

Santiago Juarez who ran the “Faithful Citizenship” program for the Catholic Archdiocese in New Mexico, told me that “his” voters, poor Hispanics, whom he identified as solid Kerry supporters, were handed the iffy provisional ballots. Hispanics were given provisional ballots, rather than the countable kind “almost religiously,” he said, at polling stations when there was the least question about a voter’s identification. Some voters, Santiago said, were simply turned away.

Your Kerry Victory Party

So we can call Ohio and New Mexico for John Kerry?if we count all the votes.

But that won’t happen. Despite the Democratic Party’s pledge, the leadership this time gave in to racial disenfranchisement once again. Why? No doubt, the Democrats know darn well that counting all the spoiled and provisional ballots will require the cooperation of Ohio’s Secretary of State, Blackwell. He will ultimately decide which spoiled and provisional ballots get tallied. Blackwell, hankering to step into Kate Harris’ political pumps, is unlikely to permit anything close to a full count. Also, Democratic leadership knows darn well the media would punish the party for demanding a full count.

What now? Kerry won, so hold your victory party. But make sure the shades are down: it may be become illegal to demand a full vote count under PATRIOT Act III.

I used to write a column for the Guardian papers in London. Several friends have asked me if I will again leave the country. In light of the failure?a second time?to count all the votes, that won’t be necessary. My country has left me

An author on Salon offers this gem:

[You can read the whole article for free if you’re not a subscriber, but you’ll need to watch an ad]

“But like many liberals I’m betting on the Armageddon theory of politics. Bush and the GOP majorities in the House and Senate will make things so bad in the next four years that the country will never elect a Republican ever again. So here’s hoping things get much, much worse!”

Eric Alterman offers this beaut of a column – I’ll post the whole thing so you can absorb the disdain, condescension, and malice:


? November 3, 2004 | 11:11 AM ET

(Still) A Land of Hopes and Dreams

Let?s face it. It?s not Kerry?s fault. It?s not Nader?s fault (this time). It?s not the media?s fault (though they do bear a heavy responsibility for much of what ails our political system). It?s not ?our? fault either. The problem is just this: Slightly more than half of the citizens of this country simply do not care about what those of us in the ?reality-based community? say or believe about anything.

They don?t care that Iraq is turning into murderous quicksand and a killing field for our children. They don?t care that the Bush presidency has made us less safe by creating more terrorists, inspiring more anti-American hatred and refusing to engage in the hard work that would be necessary to make a meaningful dent in our myriad vulnerabilities at home. They don?t care that he has mortgaged our children?s future to give trillions to the wealthiest among us. They don?t care that the economy continues to hemorrhage well-paying jobs and replace them with Wal-Mart; that the number without health insurance is over forty million and rising. They don?t care that Medicare premiums are rising to fund the coffers of pharmaceutical companies. They don?t care that the air they breathe and the water they drink is being slowly poisoned and though they call themselves conservatives, they even don?t care that the size of the government and its share of our national income has increased by roughly a quarter in just four years. This is not a world of rational debate and issue preference.

It?s one of ?them? and ?us.? He?s one of ?them? and not one of ?us? and that?s all they care about. True it?s an illusion. After all, Bush is a millionaire?s son who went to Yale and Harvard and sat out Vietnam, not even bothering to show up for his cushy National Guard duty, and succeeded only in trading on his father?s name and connections in adult life. But somehow, they feel he understands them. He speaks their language. Our guys don?t. And unless they learn it, we will continue to condemn this country and those parts of the world it affects to a regime of malign neglect at best?malignant and malicious assault at worse.

Given the media?s talent for pandering to their lowest common denominator, the things that have driven us crazy about their past pathetic performance are bound to get a lot worse. Most of us?readers and writers of this web log and peoplelikeus-- derive an awful lot of benefit from being Americans. We owe it to our better selves, and though it sounds horribly clich?d, to our children-- not to walk away from this battle. I will admit, however, it?s pretty damn hard to see through this fog just where to turn before we march.

A final word to readers while we all try to take in the news. I deeply appreciated all the warmth and gratitude sent in yesterday, and I send it back. Everybody should understand, however, that I get paid to do this. Everybody else who contributes of their time and expertise does it because they just happen to care so damn much they can?t help themselves. No one, as all my readers know, is more important to the flavor and voice of this site than the great Charles Pierce. I know he?s done much to keep my spirits up this past year and illuminate the corners of the media that would go unseen and unreported save for his proverbial eagle eye and rapier wit. As you can see below, Charles is particularly moving and brilliant today and I just want to say how lucky I feel that he chose Altercation as his home away from home. Go Sox.

Name: Charles Pierce
Hometown: Newton, MA
Hey Doc –
As Mo Udall once put it, the people have spoken, goddamn them.

They showed up. The Republican base, that is. The people who believe that their marriages are threatened by those of gay people, the people who believe there were WMD in Iraq and that Saddam waved a hankie at Mohammed Atta, the people who believe His eye is on every embryo. They all showed up, and there are more of them than there are of us. This was a faith-based electorate and, for whatever reason, their belief was stronger than our reality. This is a country I do not recognize any more.

The kids didn’t vote. African-American turnout seems to have stayed pretty much the same as it was in 2000, despite all the talk. We lost seats in the Senate and in the House. (Daschle is a pretty momentous beat, despite the fact that he’s not a wartime consigliore and never was.) They elected a polite David Duke in Louisiana, and someone who doesn’t believe gay people should teach school in South Carolina, and a creep in Oklahoma, and somebody who’s fairly obviously drifting into the fog in Kentucky. The pretty clearly indictable DeLay tactics in Texas worked like a charm. These are all victories won on grounds on which we cannot compete. When gay marriage trumps dead soldiers in Iraq, how do you run a race without dissolving into fantasy?

I don’t know this country’s mind any more, let alone its heart.

I started getting worried when my friend inside the Kerry bunker stopped calling, and then the nets were so damned slow about calling anything. (And NBC was precipitate in calling Ohio, no matter how it turns out, so little Russ and Jack Welch can congratulate each other this summer on Nantucket.) They had to know about New Hampshire sooner than they called it, and Minnesota and Michigan, neither of which was very close.

So, truly, no concession, no matter how much Russert wants one. Lawyer it up in Ohio to the very last second. Make them sweat. Make them bleed. But know that you ran this time for the president of a very different United States.

Later, that same day…
Hey Doc –
OK, now I’m starting to feel the gorge rise. Let us content ourselves with this. The country voted for these guys with its eyes open. Let us hear no complaining about “bait and switch,” and a “uniter, not a divider,” and on and on and on. It even returned a national legislature consonant with the incumbent’s agenda. There will be permanent tax cuts that will institutionalize a national debt that will force some sort of evisceration of Social Security and Medicare. There will be continued military adventurism in the Middle East. There will be Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Chief Justice Antonin Scalia. There will be more lying and more vengeance.

So let there be no whining when your husband’s National Guard obligation leaves him under fire for six extra months, or when Granny and Gramps are eating cat food, or when it become increasingly impossible to meet the economic needs of the middle-class family.

No complaining. None of it.

You wanted this guy. Now you have him, unleashed.

Some more angry, bitter screeds you can read for yourselves, should you be so inclined:

Maureen Dowd:

Gary Wills:

Blogger Atrios:

And here’s the article I quoted on another thread, from the NYT, showing the disdain average New York Kerry supporters feel toward Bush voters.

How familiar I am with that sort of thinking. I’m not sure what the big difference is between so-called “street smarts” and being influenced by what your friends say. There is a lot of self-flattery that goes into the belief that your side is the sophisticated, savvy side.

All human beings indulge in self-flattery and stoke their own self-esteem by visualizing those on the other side as ignorant and inept. “If only you would think straight and get some information, you would agree with me!” This sort of attitude doesn’t win you any friends with those at whom you’re aiming your condescension, and they certainly won’t trust you when you spout off paternalistic visions of what they should be thinking and how they should be voting.

A Blue City (Disconsolate, Even) Bewildered by a Red America

Published: November 4, 2004

Striking a characteristic New York pose near Lincoln Center yesterday, Beverly Camhe clutched three morning newspapers to her chest while balancing a large latte and talked about how disconsolate she was to realize that not only had her candidate, John Kerry, lost but that she and her city were so out of step with the rest of the country.

“Do you know how I described New York to my European friends?” she said. “New York is an island off the coast of Europe.”

Like Ms. Camhe, a film producer, three of every four voters in New York City gave Mr. Kerry their vote, a starkly different choice from the rest of the nation. So they awoke yesterday with something of a woozy existential hangover and had to confront once again how much of a 51st State they are, different in their sensibilities, lifestyles and polyglot texture from most of America. The election seemed to reverse the perspective of the famous Saul Steinberg cartoon, with much of the land mass of America now in the foreground and New York a tiny, distant and irrelevant dot.

Some New Yorkers, like Meredith Hackett, a 25-year-old barmaid in Brooklyn, said they didn’t even know any people who had voted for President Bush. (In both Manhattan and the Bronx, Mr. Bush received 16.7 percent of the vote.) Others spoke of a feeling of isolation from their fellow Americans, a sense that perhaps Middle America doesn’t care as much about New York and its animating concerns as it seemed to in the weeks immediately after the attack on the World Trade Center.

“Everybody seems to hate us these days,” said Zito Joseph, a 63-year-old retired psychiatrist. "None of the people who are likely to be hit by a terrorist attack voted for Bush. But the heartland people seemed to be saying, ‘We’re not affected by it if there would be another terrorist attack.’ "

City residents talked about this chasm between outlooks with characteristic New York bluntness.

Dr. Joseph, a bearded, broad-shouldered man with silken gray hair, was sharing coffee and cigarettes with his fellow dog walker, Roberta Kimmel Cohn, at an outdoor table outside the hole-in-the-wall Breadsoul Cafe near Lincoln Center. The site was almost a clich? corner of cosmopolitan Manhattan, with a newsstand next door selling French and Italian newspapers and, a bit farther down, the Lincoln Plaza theater showing foreign movies.

“I’m saddened by what I feel is the obtuseness and shortsightedness of a good part of the country - the heartland,” Dr. Joseph said. “This kind of redneck, shoot-from-the-hip mentality and a very concrete interpretation of religion is prevalent in Bush country - in the heartland.”

“New Yorkers are more sophisticated and at a level of consciousness where we realize we have to think of globalization, of one mankind, that what’s going to injure masses of people is not good for us,” he said.

His friend, Ms. Cohn, a native of Wisconsin who deals in art, contended that New Yorkers were not as fooled by Mr. Bush’s statements as other Americans might be. “New Yorkers are savvy,” she said. “We have street smarts. Whereas people in the Midwest are more influenced by what their friends say.”

“They’re very 1950’s,” she said of Midwesterners. “When I go back there, I feel I’m in a time warp.”

Dr. Joseph acknowledged that such attitudes could feed into the perception that New Yorkers are cultural elitists, but he didn’t apologize for it.

“People who are more competitive and proficient at what they do tend to gravitate toward cities,” he said.

Like those in the rest of the country, New Yorkers stayed up late watching the results, and some went to bed with a glimmer of hope that Mr. Kerry might yet find victory in some fortuitous combination of battleground states. But they awoke to reality. Some politically conscious children were disheartened - or sleepy - enough to ask parents if they could stay home. But even grownups were unnerved.

“To paraphrase our current president, I’m in shock and awe,” said Keithe Sales, a 58-year-old former publishing administrator walking a dog near Central Park. He said he and friends shared a feeling of “disempowerment” as a result of the country’s choice of President Bush. "There is a feeling of ‘What do I have to do to get this man out of office?’’’

In downtown Brooklyn, J. J. Murphy, 34, a teacher, said that Mr. Kerry’s loss underscored the geographic divide between the Northeast and the rest of the country. He harked back to Reconstruction to help explain his point.

“One thing Clinton and Gore had going for them was they were from the South,” he said. “There’s a lot of resentment toward the Northeast carpetbagger stereotype, and Kerry fit right in to that.”

Mr. Murphy said he understood why Mr. Bush appealed to Southerners in a way that he did not appeal to New Yorkers.

“Even though Bush isn’t one of them - he’s a son of privilege - he comes off as just a good old boy,” Mr. Murphy said.


Good stuff. Something we’ve all sat around and discussed are the number of parochial and outrageously bitter statements coming out of the mouths of those that voted against Bush.

I have never seen so many little ‘d’ democrats convert to aristocratic elitists so fast. Surprising, and yet not to surprising.

Apparently, ‘democracy’ and the ‘will of the people’ are only good things if the unwashed masses don’t bother to show up and vote. The kinds of things I’m hearing sound like Tale of Two Cities kind of rancor.

Kerry, for his part, looked every part the statesman in his concession. No wonder he didn’t win - he doesn’t accurately represent the people who voted for him.


I would happily contribute to a fund to pay for Palast’s ticket, provided it was one-way.

Same for all the other people calling Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. And Alec Baldwin and Barbra Streisand – they promised, after all…

This one is from a Brit – while he’s not in our electorate, unfortunately, Tony Blair has to listen to his crap:

An excerpt:

"As for the ones who put him in, across the Bible Belt and the South, us outsiders can only feel pity…the self-righteous, gun-totin’, military lovin’, sister marryin’, abortion-hatin’, gay-loathin’, foreigner-despisin’, non-passport ownin’ red-necks, who believe God gave America the biggest d*** in the world so it could urinate on the rest of us and make their land “free and strong”.

Someone, I think, needs a nice cup of tea - and urgent psychiatric attention.

Aw, give these people time. Some of them have just had their “hopes and dreams” crushed. They are going to vent and be bitter for a while.

Hopefully a short while.

The concept of spoilage leaning one way or the other is interesting. It may point to a need to equalize the voting process so that it spoils indescriminately. No need to point fingers in either direction to consider that appropriate though.

So, yes, don’t get me wrong, I’m agreeing, there are angry and bitter losers out there.

[quote]vroom wrote:
Aw, give these people time. Some of them have just had their “hopes and dreams” crushed. They are going to vent and be bitter for a while.

Hopefully a short while.

The concept of spoilage leaning one way or the other is interesting. It may point to a need to equalize the voting process so that it spoils indescriminately. No need to point fingers in either direction to consider that appropriate though.

So, yes, don’t get me wrong, I’m agreeing, there are angry and bitter losers out there.[/quote]

Palast is always “interesting.”

Everyone else – Dems, Republicans, media, etc. – is trying to figure out why the exit polling data was flawed, and Palast has constructed a conspiracy in which the polling data was what was correct and somehow there was a massive disenfranchisement of Kerry voters.

They need to increase his meds too.

I think these quotes need to be put into context. As a Canadian, I am of the typical view that having someone other than Bush elected would have been better for the world, and the US. There is a huge amount of mistrust toward the Bush administration, particularly w.r.t. its invasion of Iraq.

We just fear that having Bush in for another 4 years will worsen the international political climate and that means that Iraq will remain a bleeding sore for your country. (I sincerely doubt that the members of U.N. Security Council would be willing to help out after Bush trampled the U.N. regulations by invading Iraq)

There is a growing fear that the US has adopted “democracy” as its new religion, and that it is now out on a crusade to re-educate the world.

While this imperialistic reference is perhaps somewhat harsh, I don’t think it is entirely inaccurate. Let?s face it, you have already killed over 100,000 Iraqi civilians and by voting Bush you have just told the world that you think that this is acceptable. While I don’t believe that it is entirely the case, it certainly might explain some of the rather “unpatriotic” backlash (or perhaps it is “patriotic” backlash?).

As an aside, does anyone think that it will be possible for the US to set up a real government in Iraq without the UN? Do you think that there is sufficient trust for that to happen without years of bloodshed?

And now for something completely different–an unhappy libertarian (probably belongs in a different thread, but this will do).

I’m not saying I agree (completely)…

Oh and before you think he’s nuts keep in mind John Adams who said:

“there was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”

One of the ways that happens is that the majority vote themselves money from the public treasury (ya we’re not a democracy, a republic, still applies)

Robert Thompson (blogger who writes computer books):

Now that the Republicans have control of the House and the Senate and the possibility of appointing two or three Supreme Court justices over the next four years, I think it should be a high priority for them to concentrate on disenfranchising the fringe voters that make up the base of the Democrats.

I would like to see them introduce means tests for voting, as well as literacy tests and a poll tax. Also, anyone who is a net tax consumer should be ineligible to vote. That includes government employees at any level as well as anyone who’s on the public dole, which often amounts to the same thing. Allowing tax consumers to vote is a conflict of interest. It doesn’t include retired people who are on Social Security or other government pensions. They paid for those.

Most of the problems this country faces result from the enfranchisement of fringe voters who vote themselves bread and circuses, in the process shifting the entire political spectrum far to the left. We no longer have the opportunity to vote for right or centrist candidates, just left or lefter, soft-core socialist like Bush or hard-core socialist like Kerry. This must be stopped, and the Republicans are now in a position to do so. Disenfranchising the poor and the stupid, who invariably support the Democrats, would benefit all of us, ultimately including the poor and the stupid.

That would leave the Democratic Party as an empty husk, and therein lies an opportunity. Rather than continuing to attempt to establish themselves as a viable third party, the Libertarians should move into that husk, redefine it, and begin challenging the Republican Party on an equal basis. We’d then have the refreshing prospect of Conservatives challenging Libertarians, which is what politics should be about. The Socialists and other left-wingers would be out in the cold, where they should be.


“As a Canadian, I am of the typical view that having someone other than Bush elected would have been better for the world, and the US”

Better for the world I can understand your saying, but better for the US…

Let see…you think you know what is better for someone else (the US) then they do themselves…you must be a liberal. I suspect there is a more precise word then liberal, but there are clearly some liberals who think they know better “for us then we do”.

This is why I have some libertarian tendencies and the US need to be protected from those of our citizens like Kieran. Afraid Bush is going to impose religion on you? not likely. Be very afraid someone like Kieran gets into power in the US and imposes on us what they know is best for us. Now that is a real danger.

The types of conspiracy theories in the editorials you linked to belong on UFO and skull&bones webpages, not in real political discourse.

Just how would Diebold machines systematically remove democrat votes? machines don’t just act on their own, they are programmed, and programming like that would be obvious in the code running the machine. Would you put out tens of thousands of machines with damning, incriminating code in it? I highly doubt it. The quote that liberals like so often from the Diebold CEO, that he is “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year”, was written in a fundraising letter on his personal time, not as the CEO of the company. Do kerry supporters really believe that their votes in ohio weren’t counted? does there always need to be some imagined “disenfranchisement” in every election that is the real reason they didnt win?


Palast is completely retarded, mostly due to the fact that the exit poll data was very wrong, for all states – including those not using the Diebold machines. Some of the ones in which it was most incorrect, such as Pennsylvania, used the fewest machines (for those who don’t know, most states initiate voting machines and procedures on a county-by-county basis).

I’m presuming that Palast, a political journalist and a guy who’s been through many elections (although he is widely viewed as a nutjob here at home, apparently he gets more play abroad – mostly because that audience is too unaware of the baseline facts to recongnize his crap right away), knows this, and either his fevered brain is not capable of thinking logically or he’s lying to keep his conspiracy-minded readers happy. Remember, this is the same guy who floated the theory that the oil companies were conspiring to elect Schwarzenegger in California.

Sounds like he is trying to stumble across “The Pelican Brief”…