Reply #58: yeah, your analysis seems skewed

[OnTheOtherHand]

Not to call out people by name, but I certainly don't accept that some of the folks who have weighed in on this thread are "activists" with a "bigger picture" than Febble's. I can't direct you to posts, because they have been deleted. These folks may or may not be activists, but if they can't even keep their posts up on DU, I do not like their chances of promoting positive change in the outside world.

I think your post is very unfair to activists here on the board. I think most activists realize that one pays a price for insisting upon "facts" that aren't facts, and flaming anyone who disagrees. Calls for false unity aren't "activism," and opposing them isn't "hairsplitting." (And, no, I am not claiming to know all the facts.) Note that I say "insisting upon." There is no great price for just being wrong about something; that is the human condition. But when we are loudly, stubbornly, and abusively wrong, then we pay a price -- or, actually, the entire movement pays a price.

Do you actually think it is irrelevant whether Freeman is right or wrong? If you do, have you asked him to withdraw his manuscript because the stakes are so low? This "hairsplitting" idea seems totally one-sided in application to me, but maybe I don't understand yet what you are saying.

As for what I will think of Freeman's book: judging from conversations and Freeman's presentation in Montreal, his thinking doesn't seem to have changed much since he presented in Philadelphia in October. His arguments there were radically unpersuasive, and I would be happy to explain why. (Of course I can't yet comment on the arguments he hasn't yet presented.) I do not think it is hairsplitting to consider whether or not the exit polls indicate vote miscount on the order of nine or ten milllion votes. I think activists deserve some guidance as to how Freeman's argument will go over (and has gone over) with relevant experts, and why. Some will continue to blame fear, or careerism, or Rove money. I do not apologize for believing that activists deserve better arguments than that. In fact, I think most activists have better arguments than that.