The whole world is watching. The Consortium
offers a good overview of foreign reactions to our miserable election. This passage has particular impact:
On Oct. 21, the Permanent Representative of Belarus to the OSCE issued a harsh statement about the U.S. electoral system, asserting that it "does not meet present-day requirements, is archaic, unwieldy, frequently complicated and bureaucratic in nature and, in the final analysis, does not guarantee the holding of genuinely democratic elections."
The Belarus representative noted that the United States itself has criticized early voting and electronic voting in other countries because the lack of security could lead to "manipulating voters' votes."
Getting dissed -- justifiably -- by a former Soviet republic! Only a Bush could bring us to such a pretty pass...
Another look at Coyote.
Previously, we took a look at Peter Coyote's list
of oddball circumstances that brought us to this strange electoral place. Now let us note something he says in his preamble:
On Friday I received a phone call from a good friend who works at CBS--I've known her for years and she is a Producer for some of the news programs, one well known one in particular. She tipped me off that the news media is in a "lock-down" and that there is to be no TV coverage of the real problems with voting on Nov. 2nd. She said similar "lock-down orders" had come down last year after the invasion of Iraq, but this is far worse--far scarier. She said the majority of their journalists at CBS and elsewhere in NYC are pretty horrified--every one is worried about their jobs and retribution Dan Rather style or worse. My source said they've also been forbidden to talk about it even on their own time...
Bev Harris said much the same thing!
He has a great new video report, which you can see here
. In it, we learn that the Green/Libertarian recount effort will wisely seek to have Blackwell recused, given his partisanship.
We also learn that the optical scanner results in New Hampshire (which Kerry narrowly won) may show some of the same anomalies (Dem counties switching parties) the Dopp report allegedly demonstrated in Florida. Boy, those "Dixiecrats" turn up in the damnedest
places, don't they?
Professor John Cleese on the elections:
Academics and experts such as Dr. Freeman have lent their names to the proposition that something funny happened on election night. You knew that the other side would have to find an academic or two to shore up their part in the debate. (Recall how big tobacco could always find a doctor willing to tout its party line?) This study
from a Cal Tech/M.I.T. project attempts to demonstrate that the exit polls fell within the margin of error.
They're doing it again, people -- just as I predicted. The routine never stops.
They say: "Exit polls can have errors."
And we say: "The errors should skew in both directions."
And they reply: "Exit polls aren't accurate."
And we say: "Look, bub, you didn't hear me. No matter how tiny or large the margin of error is, the error should skew in both directions."
And they reply: "Well, we've prepared this chart showing that the poll results were within the margin of error..."
And our side ultimately has no choice but to scream:
"THE SIZE OF THE MARGIN OF ERROR DOES NOT COUNT! THE PATTERN IS WHAT COUNTS! IF ERRORS OCCUR, THEY SHOULD UNDERVALUE THE DEMOCRATIC VOTE AS OFTEN AS THEY UNDERVALUE THE REPUBLICAN VOTE! BUT ONLY THE REPUBLICAN VOTE IS EVER UNDERVALUED! IN STATE AFTER STATE! ELECTION AFTER ELECTION! THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN IN OTHER COUNTRIES! IT ONLY HAPPENS WHEN BUSH RUNS FOR OFFICE IN THIS COUNTRY! DO YOU UNDERSTAND -- FINALLY -- YOU THICK DOLT?!?!?!"
And they reply, "Well, you see, exit polls aren't always accurate..."
And we suddenly realize that we are trapped in a Monty Python routine. No matter what we say, they will repeat the same line over and over. Exit polls aren't accurate. And that parrot isn't dead. It's just pining for the fjords.