Political Animal (WA Monthly) - Waiting for Ohio

[RSchewe]

Just passing this on for those that are following everything related to the Ohio voting irregularities. I found it interesting.

Matt Taibbi has gotten a lot of attention in the left blogosphere for writing that after starting out as a skeptic, he's suddenly become a believer that there was funny business in Ohio that cost John Kerry the presidency last year. His Road to Damascus moment came after he was invited to a panel discussion and then learned that the topic was "What went wrong in Ohio? A Harper's Magazine Forum on Voting Irregularities in the 2004 Election"

For what it's worth, though, I thought I'd take the chance to mention that the best case I've seen so far in favor of foul play in Ohio came from Christopher Hitchens. Writing in Vanity Fair, he suggested that it wasn't the sheer number of irregularities that mattered so much as the fact that they all pointed in the same direction

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_08/006859.php

[FreedomAngel82]

1. Thank you for this

I've been wondering what's up with Taibbai's article. I was really surprised myself that he was speaking about this. I saw him on the "Daily Show" talking about his book and he wasn't a huge Kerry fan so this coming from him is really quite suprising. I still haven't seen Taibbai's article though, so I wonder what's up. :shrug:

[Cha]

3. I saw matt tiabbi on that

same Daily Show and was very mad at him for the stupid unfounded talking points he was making at Kerry.

I wondered why you couldn't wait to see the lastest matt tiabbi had to write about..

This is Huge coming from him. :fingerscrossed:

[MissMarple]

2. Well bless Hitchens' little boozy heart.

:)

"...But what strikes my eye is this: in practically every case where lines were too long or machines too few the foul-up was in a Democratic county or precinct, and in practically every case where machines produced impossible or improbable outcomes it was the challenger who suffered and the actual or potential Democratic voters who were shortchanged, discouraged, or held up to ridicule as chronic undervoters or as sudden converts to fringe-party losers."