Recount: Palast vs. Manjoo

[TimeToGo]

A denate between Palast and Manjoo -- I've given a couple of paragaphs each.

___________
Presidential debate
Reporter Greg Palast and Salon's Farhad Manjoo debate the election results in Ohio.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
Nov. 16, 2004 |

Greg Palast:

Sean Hannity called me a putz. Oh, my! And soft-porn-site scribe Frank Salvato put me in with the "black helicopter" conspiracy league. Golly!

I can live with that. But when Salon disses my report of vote suppression in Ohio ("Was the Election Stolen?" by Farhad Manjoo), I have to respond. Manjoo went after my article, "Kerry Won," the latest in my series of investigations of our manipulated election system first published in America by ... Salon: "Florida's Flawed 'Voter-Cleansing' Program."

Now, the facts. Most voters in Ohio cast their ballots for John Kerry, which should, in accordance with Mrs. Gordon's civics lessons from sixth grade, have given Kerry the Electoral College majority and the White House. Trouble is, those votes won't be counted.

SNIP

Farhad Manjoo:

I appreciate Greg Palast's response to my article criticizing his argument that Kerry won the presidency on Nov. 2. Unfortunately, though, I don't see anything new in his letter to bolster his claims; Palast's theory, as I see it, remains at best just that, a theory that Kerry would be declared the winner if someone would just take the time to count the "spoiled" ballots spit out by punch-card machines in Ohio.

Palast rests his claims on the fact that Republicans have long tried to suppress the votes of minorities -- a point on which I agree, and have documented. Because the GOP has attempted, in the past, to either keep black voters away from the polls or reduce the chances that their votes will be counted, Palast argues that we should assume that the same thing occurred this year in Ohio. Hundreds of thousands of African-Americans went to the polls intending to vote for Kerry, Palast says. But their votes won't be counted, and it's only for this reason that Kerry didn't win the White House.

Alas, Palast's is a theory unencumbered by much rigorous analysis. As I wrote on Tuesday, and as others -- including David Corn, of the Nation, and Daniel Tokaji, a professor of law at the Moritz College of Law -- have pointed out, there is precious little evidence to show that there are enough uncounted ballots in Kerry's favor to have given him the White House.

SNIP

Read more at:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/11/16/palast/index.html

[glitch]

1. Hmm - professional business auditor and investigator turned journalist vs

journalist? I think not a fair fight.

Just say no to faith-based vote counts, Farhad.

[jhgatiss]

2. Well...

With the "Glib" recount effort underway I guess we should get to see this theory put to the test. Game on! :)

[jmatthan]

3. My email to Salon

Not hindsight but Foresight

The arguement between Palast and Manjoo shows a basic difference in character of the two journalists.

Palast, based on his experience of investigation in Florida between 2000 and 2004, had the foresight to see what was going to happen.

Manjoo, on the other hand, follows the logic of the lawyers of the John Kerry campaign, who now claim that they did not have the experience to see that the election fraud was undertaken in a manner not conducive to the presence legal profession (and journalists as Manjoo)!!

In a article which appeared in Nashuatelegraph at

http://www.nashuatelepgraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041114/OPINION04/111140009/-1/opinion

"Did lawyer-observers on Election Day miss fraud incidents?"

By IAN H. SOLOMON, Special to The Hartford Courant
Published: Sunday, Nov. 14, 2004

Could we have been so naive?...more"

a. It shows Kerry was incompetent and had at his side a group of incompetent people to handle this situation.

b. Kerry ignored the loud warnings of people like Bev Harris who demonstrated what would happen based on past cases.

c. Kerry showed to the public that he was just Bushlite in his inability to accept that he had made a mistake!!

So probably for the people of America there is probably no difference in the election of Bush or Kerry as they are surrounded by many who meet the criteria of what is defined as the Peter Principle!!

Yes, this is a case of hindsight vs. foresight, and on that count Palast wins hands down.

Jacob Matthan
Oulu, Finland

[noiretextatique]

4. so...there is absolutely no reason at all to suspect republicans

suppressed the black vote simply because they have done it in past elections...right? :puke: is it just me, or wouldn't that fact tend to make one suspicious that they did the same thing in THIS election?

[fearnobush]

5. I believe Salon was bought out by ABC some time ago?

Correct me if I am wrong, but I know it was bought out by one of the manufactured news for max profit MSM whores.

[GregD]

6. Tokaji is not to be trusted

He has been the shit head that has haunted the chase for a paper trail. He co-opted Common Cause and it was only after a rebellion (like the one that took place in LWVUS) that they finally caved in.

Tokaji is pro-paperless voting. That alone is enough for me to distance myself from any other position he stands behind.

on edit - spelling error