John G. Mason : Questions about the Bush Victory
mardi 19 juillet 2005
Imprimer cet article | Cet article au format PDF
1) Peut-on aujourd’hui, après l’analyse des résultats, dresser une physionomie des deux camps électoraux qui se sont affrontés ?
2004 a stolen election ?
First we should note that the November 2004 election was an extremely hard fought campaign that raises serious questions in the minds of analysts about the overall integrity of the American electoral process. Coming after the judicial “coup d’Etat de velours” that decided the 2000 election in favor of Mr. Bush ; fears that this year’s election would be stolen were widely felt on the Left before the election.
Now, many feel that their worst fears were realized for two reasons : the weird discrepancy between the election-day exit polls that reported Kerry getting 5 million more votes than he actually ended up receiving in the official count, and the massive number of “spoiled” minority ballots that were invalidated after they were cast.
In the days following the November election, there was a great deal of speculation in the “blogosphere” asking whether the winning formula for the Republicans in 2004 hadn’t been two parts evangelical mobilization in rural America to one part massive voter fraud in Florida and Ohio.
This line of speculation was soon backed up by academic specialists such as Steve Freeman of the University of Pennsylvania, who argued that the discrepancies between exit poll data and the reported vote from the some swing states like Ohio constitute a clear indication that there was massive voter fraud at the county or state level - just as they would anywhere else in the world and as they did recently in the Ukraine . Freeman’s argument has been backed by seasoned reporters such as the BBC’s Greg Palast but also strongly disputed by other progressive analysts such as Ruy Teixeira of and David Corn of The Nation.
<snip>
more
http://www.temps-reels.net/article1679.html