PDA

View Full Version : Al franken won!


johnmarzan
01-06-2009, 09:56 AM
or was the election stolen?

bjkeefe
01-06-2009, 06:19 PM
or was the election stolen?

I did not think this question was worthy of anything more than eye-rolling, but then I came across this post from John Emerson (http://trollblog.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/franken-stole-the-election/), so I figured I'd share it:

“Franken Stole the Election!!!!”

Now that he’s lost, Norm Coleman plans to stink up the place. In his statement (http://www.mncampaignreport.com/showComment.do?commentId=3098) he revives some old claims that were knocked down weeks ago. The WSJ (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123111967642552909.html) is on board. The odious Dick Morris (http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/) is hard at work; presumably he’s being paid. The national attack is being coordinated by the Swiftboater Benjamin Ginsberg (http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/gop-recount-guru-advises-coleman-2008-12-22.html).

Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, Lott, and the WSJ have been flogging the “stolen election” idea for a month already, and now we can expect it to explode. They won’t be able to keep Franken [I think he means Coleman, obvs. --bjk] from being defeated, but they can raise suspicions. This will be just one more small obstacle in Obama’s path — keeping a Democratic Senator out of office for awhile, sucking up the media oxygen, and diverting attention from Obama’s attempts to prevent a depression, deal with the Israel Palestine dispute, etc. They want to cripple this American President the way they crippled Clinton.

The truth of the matter is that Franken honestly won a very close election after an honest, carefully done recount. The wingers will be pushing a lie: “Franken stole the election” (http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?q=Franken+AND+%22stolen+election%22+OR+ %22steal+the+election%22&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d). They don’t really need people to believe that — they just want to put Franken (and indirectly Obama) under a cloud. If the conventional wisdom becomes “Franken won in court after a controversial and flawed recount — some say he stole it”, then the wingers will have won. And something like that’s about what we should expect from the zombie media.

The battle against the lies has just begun. Some of the Republican scum seem to have been keeping their horns pulled in while it still seemed that Coleman might win, but now we can expect to see them crawling out from under their rocks. (And sorry for the mixed metaphor).

He's definitely right about the wingnuts (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=007432832765683203066%3Azj_ist-lct4&ie=UTF-8&q=franken+stole+OR+steals+election&sa=Search).

johnmarzan
01-07-2009, 01:53 AM
I did not think this question was worthy of anything more than eye-rolling, but then I came across this post from John Emerson (http://trollblog.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/franken-stole-the-election/), so I figured I'd share it:



He's definitely right about the wingnuts (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=007432832765683203066%3Azj_ist-lct4&ie=UTF-8&q=franken+stole+OR+steals+election&sa=Search).

hey, i remember gov gregoire winning in a similar manner 4 years ago.

johnmarzan
01-07-2009, 01:55 AM
“Franken stole the election”.

i don't think he stole the election. the "machine" there did it for him.

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2009/01/06/the-franken-facts/

AemJeff
01-07-2009, 09:42 AM
i don't think he stole the election. the "machine" there did it for him.

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2009/01/06/the-franken-facts/

There were judges of both parties involved in the decision-making that led to the outcome favoring Franken. Coleman's campaign didn't complain about their partisanship during the process.

And linking to Dick Morris for support is ridiculous.

nikkibong
01-07-2009, 11:28 AM
hey, i remember gov gregoire winning in a similar manner 4 years ago.

i seem to remember something about a president eight years ago . . .

bjkeefe
01-07-2009, 06:32 PM
And linking to Dick Morris for support is ridiculous.

Indeed. Automatically self-refuting. Especially after the post from John Emerson that I quoted earlier in this thread called him out .

johnmarzan
01-07-2009, 09:52 PM
i seem to remember something about a president eight years ago . . .

bush won the count in florida on election day. if they had allowed the democrats to keep recounting the votes until they got the desired outcome, he would have eventually lost the lead like gregoire and coleman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Gregoire

Christine O'Grady "Chris" Gregoire (born March 24, 1947) is the governor of the state of Washington, and a member of the Democratic party. Gregoire is known for defeating Dino Rossi in one of the closest elections in gubernatorial history. Rossi led after two machine counts by 261 votes and 47 votes, respectively, before losing a final manual count by 129 votes.[1]

johnmarzan
01-07-2009, 09:55 PM
Indeed. Automatically self-refuting. Especially after the post from John Emerson that I quoted earlier in this thread called him out .

just because you attacked the source doesn't mean you "automatically" refuted the facts.

bjkeefe
01-07-2009, 10:07 PM
just because you attacked the source doesn't mean you "automatically" refuted the facts.

Didn't mean to imply that it did. I meant that Dick Morris is, himself, automatically self-refuting; i.e., if he says something, you instantly know that it's exactly wrong. He's even more reliable than Bill Kristol in this regard.

johnmarzan
01-07-2009, 10:14 PM
Didn't mean to imply that it did. I meant that Dick Morris is, himself, automatically self-refuting; i.e., if he says something, you instantly know that it's exactly wrong. He's even more reliable than Bill Kristol in this regard.

what morris said was originally reported by the wall street journal. when you have more votes cast than people registered, this is chicago/blago style politics in "nice" minnesota.

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2009/01/07/frankens-funny-business/

The recount actually wants to count ballots in twenty-five precincts that would bring the total of votes cast higher than the actual number of people who voted! In Ramsey County, 177 more votes have been counted than people who voted on Election Day. The canvassing board, in effect, is admitting that it is counting fraudulent, duplicate ballots! In some cases absentee ballots, particularly from troops serving overseas, have been counted. In other cases, not. One ballot, on which Franken was crossed out and replaced by “Frankenstein” was counted as a Democratic vote.

Apparently, when a ballot was challenged, a copy was made to facilitate examination. But, in many cases, the canvasser failed to label the ballot as a duplicate. Then, in the recount, all the ballots were counted, ensuring that the challenged vote was not only counted, but counted twice.

What makes all of this suspicious in the extreme is that each of these errors inured to Franken’s advantage and eroded Coleman’s election night lead until the Democrat could claim victory.

bjkeefe
01-08-2009, 12:11 AM
what morris said was originally reported by the wall street journal.

Sadly, no. If you're thinking of the same source I am, you're thinking of an editorial (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123111967642552909.html), not reporting. And the WSJ editorial board is not at all credible.

johnmarzan
01-08-2009, 02:42 AM
:rolleyes:

nikkibong
01-08-2009, 02:35 PM
Sadly, no. If you're thinking of the same source I am, you're thinking of an editorial (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123111967642552909.html), not reporting. And the WSJ editorial board is not at all credible.

have you read j. chait's great TRB column from last week about the use of quotation marks in WSJ editorials? unfortunately, the TNR website is way too screwy to find the article, but it's definitely well worth a read . . .

bjkeefe
01-08-2009, 03:27 PM
have you read j. chait's great TRB column from last week about the use of quotation marks in WSJ editorials? unfortunately, the TNR website is way too screwy to find the article, but it's definitely well worth a read . . .

Izissit? (http://www.tnr.com/currentissue/story.html?id=3e721912-21ef-40ff-90b2-f70236b4f81e)

Thanks for the heads-up. A fun read.

And yeah, TNR's website is beyond inexcusably bad, it's mystifyingly bad.

[Added] A bit of follow-up (http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/01/10/the-wall-street-journal-goes-crazy-with-quotation-marks.aspx).

TwinSwords
01-08-2009, 07:16 PM
unfortunately, the TNR website is way too screwy to find the article, but it's definitely well worth a read . . .

LOL! Their website sucks and blows. At the same time.

bjkeefe
01-10-2009, 10:06 AM
:rolleyes:

I take from your eye-rolling that you do not have a real rebuttal. Maybe, however, you think my assertion is unfounded. If so, you might find Nate Silver's analysis of the WSJ editorial (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/01/did-wall-street-jorunal-fire-their-fact.html) worth a look.

Hat tip for this link to Joe Conason, whose rebuttal to the "Franken stole the election" myth (http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2009/01/09/franken/index.html) is also worth reading.

uncle ebeneezer
01-10-2009, 03:24 PM
This is a complete hijacking of the Democratic process. Counting votes is Marxism. If only the Supreme Court had stepped in the way they are supposed to.

Ann Althouse thinks the whole thing is "fishy" too. I rest my case ;-)

Though I'm no huge fan of Franken, his victory is giving me the most delightful taste of schadenfrede (sp?)

bjkeefe
01-10-2009, 05:31 PM
This is a complete hijacking of the Democratic process. Counting votes is Marxism. If only the Supreme Court had stepped in the way they are supposed to.

Ann Althouse thinks the whole thing is "fishy" too. I rest my case ;-)

Though I'm no huge fan of Franken, his victory is giving me the most delightful taste of schadenfrede (sp?)

LOL!

I remind the world that Ann Althouse describes herself as someone who "listens to Rush all the time."

But she's not a conservative, and you better not call her that, OR SO HELP ME, I'LL HANG THIS PHONE UP RIGHT NOW!!!1!

bjkeefe
01-11-2009, 06:46 PM
A little more, from Media Matters, debunking Malkin, NewsMax, and Fox News (http://mediamatters.org/items/200901080010?f=h_latest).

bjkeefe
01-15-2009, 03:48 PM
And the WSJ editorial board is not at all credible.

Another WSJ opinion piece, another debunking (http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/2009/01/pretending-that-bush-v-gore-was.html).

bjkeefe
01-24-2009, 06:19 PM
And the WSJ editorial board is not at all credible.

A blast from the too-recent past. (http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/work_cited/)