Sunday, June 11, 2006
Politics - Was the 2004 election stolen? No.
Who to believe; Robert F. Kennedy Jr., or the guy that says, "his argument is filled with distortions and blatant omissions"?...
Farhad Manjoo picks Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s recent Rolling Stone article apart:
"If you do read Kennedy's article, be prepared to machete your way through numerous errors of interpretation and his deliberate omission of key bits of data. The first salient omission comes in paragraph 5, when Kennedy writes, 'In what may be the single most astounding fact from the election, one in every four Ohio citizens who registered to vote in 2004 showed up at the polls only to discover that they were not listed on the rolls, thanks to GOP efforts to stem the unprecedented flood of Democrats eager to cast ballots.' To back up that assertion, Kennedy cites 'Democracy at Risk,' the report the Democrats released last June."
"That report does indeed point out that many people -- 26 percent -- who first registered in 2004 did not find their names on the voter rolls at polling places. What Kennedy doesn't say, though, is that the same study found no significant difference in the share of Kerry voters and Bush voters who came to the polls and didn't find their names listed. The Democrats' report says that 4.2 percent of Kerry voters were forced to cast a 'provisional' ballot and that 4.1 percent of Bush voters were made to do the same -- a stat that lowers the heat on Kennedy's claim of 'astounding' partisanship."
"Such techniques are evident throughout Kennedy's article. He presents a barrage of seemingly important, apparently damning data to show that Kerry won the race. It's only when you dig into his claims that you see what thin ice he's on."
