Greg Palast Election 2004
TomPaine.com: An Election Spoiled Rotten by Greg Palast (11.01.2004)
TomPaine.com: Kerry Won. . . by Greg Palast (11.04.2004)
I don't see major substantiation of the claim that absentee ballots were intentionally -- or unintentionally -- lost. Palast makes somewhat speculative points, and then essentially argues against any possible claims about absentee ballots when he says
"How do you know if your ballot was received? Was it tossed behind a file cabinet—or tossed out because you did not include your middle initial?"
Clearly, mistakes were made. I don't argue that. I believe many thousands of votes were probably "lost". But I think it is important to put things in perspective -- it was a close election no matter how you slice it. In assessing the "fraud" we should focus on sorting the bureaucratic bungles from intentional disenfranchisement. I think it is extremely important to differentiate conspiratorial activities from the sort of bureaucratic oversight we have come to expect from the government.
The spoilage issue seems major. But where are some hardhitting sources? Palast kinda comes up short on quotes. Where are the quotes from the election officials in Rio Arriba, New Mexico, explaining the "disappearance" of votes in 2000? Palast claims "not one single vote was cast for president" in the 2000 election in Rio Arriba. And I don't doubt this one bit. But where is the source?? Where can we verify this information?? I don't doubt Greg's assertions, but these are major claims which -- if true -- it should be easy to get a prominent and credible person to substantiate.
We need the names, dates, and places of the people who can verify election spoilage. It's that simple. Otherwise, we got no case and we should save our breath. Or at least, we could shift the debate to focusing on preventing all types of irregularities in the future -- whether intentional fraud or bureaucratic bungles.
Posted by Eric on November 9, 2004 06:48 PM
