Greg Palast for "The nation"

[SueZhope]

A STOLEN ELECTION
THE VIEW FROM MY BLACK HELICOPTER

The Nation
I'd just stepped out of my black helicopter to read that one of my favorite journalists, David Corn, had attacked my analysis of the vote in Ohio as the stuff of "grassy knoll conspiracy theorists." ("A Stolen Election," The Nation, November 29 issue.)


http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=402&row=0

[glitch]

1. Greg Palast can run circles around David Corn. Glad he's rebutting that

shash. Thanks for posting!

[daa]

3. Palast sucks compared to Corn eom

[RaulVB]

4. Odd opinion

Considering that Corn gives crap about American black voters.

[SueZhope]

5. just wondering

why you feel that way?

[RaulVB]

7. David Corn

I think that some "left leaning intellectuals" in the US are just too biased to the political establishment and like the "status quo.".

Corn refuses to even consider black voting disinfranchisement, that was the main argument behind Palast's article. The basic view of "Americans are not better than other corrupt political operatives overseas", really bugs the hell out of people like Corn and Al Franken, among others.

Regards.

[SueZhope]

8. yes i agree

I was confused why the person said Palast sucks
next to corn

It seems that Greg is a man of honer from what i have read and heard from him
he is not afraid to go places many dare not go....and he backs up is claims with research

[angrydemocrat]

17. Other's Here Have Asked You Why You Would Think

Palast sucks compared to Corn. You never answered. But let me put it to you like this "Opinions Are Like A$$holes Everybody Has One" As you can see there are many that disagree.

[RaulVB]

2. Palast should have said:

"He used to be one of my favorite journalists..."

Game, set, match for Greg!

[Greybnk48]

6. Corn

I read Corn's article and was miffed that he mentioned the Berkeley study--pointing out that it was the work of grad-students but did not mention the thorough analysis by Freemen out of Penn or the analysis by the asst. dean of Yale Law school (forget his name--sorry). To my knowledge Freeman's analysis of the exit polling data has not been challenged--or has it?

[Helga Scow Stern]

10. Yes, it was challenged by blogger who calls himself "The Mystery Pollster"

Mark Blumenthal. He had a subtle (but misguided) debunking, all the while based on the premise that there was no widescale fraud. Period.
And he used studies from after 2000 to discredit exit polls. :crazy:

Freeman posted a reply to his rebuttal on the site, I hope, and has since revised his paper.

Sorry I can't provide a link.

[Greybnk48]

11. Rebuttal

Ibelieve it is on his Penn website

[Helga Scow Stern]

9. I was so upset when I saw that stupid, arrogant Corn article that I posted

HAS DAVID CORN BEEN HITTING THE KOOL-AID?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x97643

I'm still too miffed to write about it intelligently.

If anyone else wants to write, there are some good threads on this post that TIA and others posted for rebuttal.

[SueZhope]

12. Thanks for posting this

Its helpful to see the original CREEPY Corn article

[glitch]

15. I was going to reply to that thread - Corn's a Kool-Aid Vendor

but I thought it was too negative and I was in a good mood.
Today, not so much.

The Nation is in a worse position than MSM. They want respectability.
Big mistake if you want to approach each situation with logic, investigation and reason.
They seek face time on television, and they have to heavily moderate their reports and opinions to get it.
They would be so much better if they just passed on the MSM face time, did their own research and wrote the results.

Now Mother Jones and Harpers are damn fine rags. They did some articles on the potential for vote fraud before the election, I am looking forward to their detailed coverage.

[jamboi]

13. Love the humor. LOL! Very effective. n/t

[Patsy Stone]

14. Excellent Info SueZ...Thanks.

but is it from...the future??? 12/29/04 ? :)

[SueZhope]

16. Ha Patsy

isn't that wild.....I guess it will be in there print issue.
or a typo???

[milkyway]

18. Umm...unfortunately, Palast was wrong. The provisionals plus the

93,000 spoiled votes will not give Kerry Ohio. Yesterday's posting of the provisionals showed that Kerry only gained about 9,000, still leaving him 118,775 votes behind bush. So even if every spoiled vote ends up being counted in a recount, and Kerry is given every single one of them, he would still be 25,000 votes behind bush.

http://election.sos.state.oh.us/results/SingleRaceSummary.aspx?race=PP

There are, of course, many other problems with the election in Ohio, but Palast was just wrong to say that "undoubtedly" the counting of the spoiled and provisionals would give Kerry Ohio. Even in the best case scenario, it would be stretching it to think Kerry could make up over 130,000 votes from only the quarter million uncounted votes.

[TR Fan]

19. I'm not sure what the problem with Corn is here...

From Palast's article...

<snip>...

Oh, my! And all because I wrote that the uncounted ballots in Ohio -- more than a quarter million designated "spoiled" or "provisional" -- undoubtedly contain enough votes to overturn George Bush's "victory" margin of 136,000.

<snip>...

Well, guess what? The recount of the provisionals, as noted elsewhere on this board, showed that Kerry got a small majority. Certainly, he did NOT get the overwhelming majority that some people here thought he would. I remember one poster indicating a "worst case scenario" that Kerry would get 85% of those ballots.

Now, let's examine what Palast says. He says that the uncounted ballots would "undoubtedly contain enough votes to overturn " *'s victory. Even if ALL 93,000 spoiled ballots are counted and if ALL go to Kerry, he's still behind by approximately 25,000 votes. And I have some land in south central Florida I can sell you as well. More likely, 70-75% of spoiled ballots will be counted and Kerry will get around 60%, leaving Bush ahead by approximately 100K.

Please do not respond with this or that irregularity that ocurred in Ohio. Many of these are probably valid, but do not address the point at hand. My discussion at least is NOT whether or not Bush won Ohio, it is with Palast's statements vs Corn's. It is clear that Corn was correct on this issue and that Palast was wrong. He can be as clever as he wants, but that does not detract from the fact that his statement is factually incorrect. I'm not sure how anyone, looking at the numbers, could disagree.

on edit: duplicate sentiment posted a bit more slowly

[milkyway]

21. It seems many people here missed the significance of yesterday's

results.

Nice post :). It's odd we posted almost the same thing at the same time.

BTW, welcome to DU, and don't worry much about the claims you're a freeper simply because you posted something that's factually correct, but not very good news.

[TR Fan]

22. Thanks, my friend n/t

[Last Lemming]

20. Ohio "vote count"

Obviously with all those swing votes going to badnarik and peroutka, neither Kerry or Bush have much of a chance of pulling this state off. . .