Freudian slip in Tuesday NYTimes article: 'Kerry beat Bush in NM'

[NewYorkerfromMass]

I am not sure if this was noted anywhere here, but on the way home last night, reading my copy of the NYTimes article on the Prosecutor purge (original title: "White House Said to Prompt Firing of Prosecutors "), I read the following passage:

Concern about voter registration fraud turned political in several states in 2004 where there were close elections, including some lost narrowly by Republican candidates. In New Mexico, for example, complaints from Republicans poured in, including some from Representative Heather Wilson and Mr. Domenici, after President Bush narrowly lost to Senator John Kerry that year, and some voters claimed that they had been unable to participate because someone had illegally voted on their behalf. The narrow loss by a Republican in the Washington State governor’s race in 2004 produced similarly politically pointed charges.

You will no longer find that passage on the NYTimes website- it has been edited and removed. , but I found a copy on a blog here: http://forum.themarkettraders.com/read-m/11/4014/4014#msg-4014

So one must ask: Is this just sloppy reporting/editing? A Freudian slip?

Whatever it may be I realize that Bush in fact was declared the official winner of New Mexico in 2004, but I also know that it was excruciatingly close, and because of the electronic machines used (with no paper record) there was no way to conduct any kind of recount. Furthermore, I understand Governor Bill Richardson ordered the machines to be wiped shortly afterwards, even though there were many questions about the closeness of the vote.

This is not a deep digging investigative post. I do not offer links to the many articles written by Greg Palast and others. It's just that it stands to reason that NM Republicans would complain about voter fraud if they thought Kerry did in fact win, or came close enough to. The fact is that Democratic activists on the ground indeed suspected there was foul play afoot the night of November 2, 2004, and it was the Karl Rove "keep Democrats from voting" machine doing the work. Among the GOP vote fraud tactics noted were: supposedly non-registered voters forced to use provisional ballots (especially on Indian Reservations), electronic machine counts changing at the last minute, and the ever-impossible task of hittting "Kerry" on the touch screens without it reading "Bush" the first one or two or fifth or 6th times. Again, many others have looked into these matters, and perhaps additional searching could turn up something more, but I am not doing so here.

I am just saying: Yes New York Times, President Bush probably did narrowly lose to John Kerry in 2004, but we'll never know.
And thanks for the reminder.

[whometense]

1. Thanks for posting this.

I only have this to add: WHERE WAS RICHARDSON?

There's an awful lot we'll never know.

Edited to add: yesterday's NYTimes is home in the recycling bin. I'm going to dig it out and if it has the same article I'll scan it.

[MH1]

2. One of the reasons I find it hard to get behind Richardson. n/t

[whometense]

3. Yeah.

Me too.

[ProSense]

4. Yup, but I still think a lot more will come out. n/t

[NewYorkerfromMass]

7. Well, did 'ya scan it?

I'd love people to see it B&W.

[blm]

5. Narrowly? More like Kerry beat Bush by 5% and the powerstructure that controlled the

voting machines, the vote count, and the corporate media coverage made certain that result was wiped out.

[underpants]

6. Nationwide or in New Mexico?

If you mean both you are correct sir

[BeFree]

8. Yep

It was stolen.

We've been robbed, twice, in 2000 and 2004.

But everything is fine now, we've gotten over it, just like the puke press told us too.