Wednesday, December 29, 2004

Democracy Saved As Ohio Recount Finishes. But Why Is Bush Still The Winner?

The Ohio Recount is officially over. And while this AP Headline-"Ohio Recount Ends, Shows Vote Closer" is technically true, it's awfully misleading. Yes, the recount requested by the Green and Libertarian parties has closed the gap between Dubya and What's his face, the dude who was in Vietnam, the gap only went from a 118,775 vote margin for Bush to a 118,457 vote margin for Bush. That's 318 fewer votes. I'm glad that the $1.5 Milliion dollars the taxpayers spent was not wasted!

However, some will never let it go, like Jesse Jackson and his attorney who say in the AP article that for some reason or another, mostly evil GOP plotting, probably, the recount was not "real" because it counted the same "flawed" votes that were cast on November 2nd, despite their having no proof about this claim at all. Olbermann, linked above, thinks that for some on the Left, the recount "battle" may become like Florida to the same bitter partisans who are still obsessed with Florida. He seems to think this might be a bad thing. I'm glad that he realizes that, though his little effort to boost tin-foil-hat conspiracy theories will probably degrade the public debate more than if he had never covered it. Lets also remember that Olbermann initially jumped on the "fraud" story over the seemingly odd but actually norman voitng patterns in Northern Florida because he never actually looked at past results there. At least he scoffs a bit when the Kerry Campaign's lawyer tries to raise questions about the "legitimacy" of the Bush win. Seriously. The guy said it might be illegitimate then backs off the next day. Only news source reporting it? Olbermann. Now, no one watches him, but I still think he hurts more than helps the election process by being a voice in the MSM that looked at the nutjob theories and then talked about them, even after any sane person would have realized that there was no "there" there. He also raises questions about whether John Conyers or Maxine Waters will try to challange the Electoral Vote in a week when it is unsealed and certified by the House. He seems to be imagining a 2000-redux here, again, where no Senator will dare challange the election. Actually, he thinks Kerry was thinking about it, but thinks him crazy to do so. Takes one to know one, Keith! Anyway, the point is, the damn recount and election are over, and Bush won fair and square. What's funny is that with the exception of the nightmare in Washington State, this election proabably had the smallest amount of fraud in a long time, at every level. We should keep refining the system, but I don't think some people on the losing side will ever be satisfied, even in George Washington himself appeared and announced the election fair. Maybe Keith would cover it, but I'm sure he'd say something ill-informed and smarmy. Well, it's over at least. Lets get on with our lives.

2 Comments:

Blogger Milhouse said...

What's funny is that with the exception of the nightmare in Washington State, this election proabably had the smallest amount of fraud in a long time, at every level.Really? What makes you say that? The only improvement I'm aware of was that first-time voters who voted in person had to show ID. That would catch some frausters, but by no means most. I'd guess that the level of fraud was at least as high as in the past, or higher, but fortunately not high enough to swing the result (except in Washington).

Wed Dec 29, 01:58:00 PM 2004  
Blogger C.M. Burns said...

Milhouse, although I should have worded it better, I still think that this election seems to have been marked with less instances of fraud at work. I base that purely on my own observation of the internet and news in general that compared to previous years, it appears that farud was lower than normal. I'm not saying there was no fraud, because obviously there was and always is, but apart from the Ohio "fraud", which is at worst just poor planning by officials and the actual theft of teh Washington Race, I'm not seeing a lot of cases of fraud. I think it's because people were more vigilant. After I read John Fund's "Stealing Elections", I girded myself for the worst, election night. Considering how bad fraud has been in previous elections, worse than most people know, I think 2004 was pretty smooth. Still, if you've got stories I haven't seen about some seriously bad cases, I want to know about 'em.

Thu Dec 30, 09:56:00 AM 2004  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home