Argumentation 101 from Election Fraud Deniers of the Left

[reprehensor]

(From Michael Collins' scathing Kennedy’s Challenge: Salon, Mother Jones & the Tortured Dialogue On Election Fraud 2004.)

Argumentation 101 from Election Fraud Deniers of the Left

What can we anticipate from election fraud deniers of the left and others based on the arguments from Salon and Mother Jones?

1. Characterize those who claim 2004 was a stolen as being under the influence of “loose with the truth” fanatics.

   Hertsgaard did it in Mother Jones when he claimed that Congressman Conyers and the other Democrats who investigated Ohio and Miller were under the influence of the powerful Bob Fitrakis and The Free Press organization. Manjoo did the same when he varied the theme and claimed that Kennedy is now under the influence of Democratic Underground and Mark Crispin Miller, If we view Mother Jones and Salon as a composite work, we now have Kennedy under the sole influence Democratic Underground and Bob Fitrakis since Hertsgaard established Fitrakis’ dominance over Miller. This is simply beyond the pale.
   

2. Diminish the value of the exit polls at all costs.

   (a) Invoke exit poll leader Warren Mitofsky’s self deprecation strategy. Have you ever heard of a major researcher suddenly diminishing his own work at the end of a long career? (b) Also resuscitate discredited explanations for the exit polls like “reluctant Bush responders” and offer those up as proof by simply saying “it’s possible” that Bush supporters were reluctant. (c) By all means, do not evaluate or interview those who have done extensive analysis on the exit polls. Simply dismiss them as “legions of activists, academics, bloggers and others who've devoted their post-Nov. 2 lives to unearthing every morsel of data that might suggest the vote was rigged…” without bothering to evaluate or mention their evidence.
   

3. Offer up your own evidence that ranges from questionable to incredible.

   Claim that the popular Ohio Supreme Court incumbent Judge Resnick’s performance in the 2000 election compared to Gore is a valid comparison to the obscure Judge Connelly’s performance compared to Kerry. Also use soundbites like that from Democratic counsel O’Grady that simply make no sense at all.
   

4. And finally, always demand that those making a serious case “prove” that the election was stolen by simply ignoring that proof is established through an in depth investigation.

   Ignore the fact that there has been no official investigation. But don’t demand an investigation yourself. That would not be prudent.

With friends like Salon and Mother Jones on the left, who needs Republicans?

Full article at top link.

Emphasis mine.

Also, check out Mark Crispin Miller's devastating open letter to Salon.

And of course... get involved.

[MissWaverly]

1. Democratic Underground is not controlling anybody

we just present factual material on what happened, much of it from eye witness reports, why
are we so criticized, if anyone posts here, they are critically reviewed with a lot
more objectively than Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson or any of their ilk.

[lonestarnot]

4. Fuck that, I can stand to the scrutiny! Vote fraud is real, and election

theft and roll scrubbing. Mother Jones can hike can't she.

[MissWaverly]

8. hey, I saw that my machine was rigged to vote Republican

Greg Palast has pictures of poll tapes from New Mexico that shows that there was no
Kerry tabulation, so it only counted votes for Bush and the 3rd parties. Once again, criticize
not the facts, but who says them.

[nolies32fouettes]

15. Honestly, it's a two way battle we have.

1. machines
2. supression

(technically 3. because what Blackwell did was find LEGAL ways to suppress the vote. So we need to get responsible people elected who will get those ways off the books--legally!)

[idgiehkt]

2. That REALLY sucks about Mother Jones

And SALON. Liberals try so hard to seem 'open-minded and fair' that half the time we are all too willing to make a meal of our own people.

So right about this.

Fuck 'em. Thanks for this and the links.

[EFerrari]

6. It's not "fairness" when you make yourself into pretzel

defending the indefensible. It's something else. Corruption, stupidity, cowardice, maybe. "Fairness" -- no.

And it would be a completely different matter if every week we found that there were no caging lists, that there were PLENTY of voting machines in minority, low income and student precincts, if we found out that what looked like massive voter registration obstruction was something else, something innocent.

But, we're not finding that, are we? That isn't the trend, is it? And to ignore the fact that every week there is yet more reason to have absolutely no confidence in our electoral process is to willfully ignore reality.

It's not "fairness".

[glitch]

12. Agreed. I also think the emphasis on distracting from the significance

of the exit poll discrepancy shows they are aware it's an achilles heel for them.
But at this point they have so many vulnerabilities, that particular target may not matter so much (not that I think we should discard it :).

[mod mom]

40. We didn't renew our subscription to MJ over this issue. Hit where they

feel it, in their pocket books!

[Cocoa]

3. large fonts and red type and bold face

the equivalent of screaming the other person down.

Then there's the name calling and the piling on on dissenters.

Very effective techniques for the election fraud activists. :toast:

[Kurovski]

14. #5. And then there will be those who argue about the way

in which the message is delivered, instead of what the message is.

Creating endless diversions and unrelated arguments, unless you finally just point out the tactic--be it intentional or unintentional--and then move on. Leaving the tactician to argue or fuss with themselves.

[Cocoa]

27. the thread is titled "Argumentation 101"

it IS about the way the message is delivered.

[Kurovski]

35. FULL Title: "Argumentation 101 from Election Fraud Deniers of the Left."

Whether you intended to or not, you created what I would say could be #5 on autorank's lesson plan.

I actually thought we might be agreeing here, but it is difficult to tell because you have estimated that 2000 was stolen, but that 2004 was not, despite there being many times more evidence of a theft--through many avenues--in 2004.

That's a big disagreement, I know, but aside from any polite disagreements parties may have between themselves on the matter, to me it is also rational to conceive that such a position possibly bespeaks an individual who either wishes to purchase some cover while undermining election reform, or simply has a desire to exercise the prerogative of stalwart contrariness, or perhaps has not studied the full history of election 2004--particularly in regard to Ohio--with the due diligence it would demand.

[Techno Dog]

18. I think you must be one of the smartest people here

What drives me nuts is this poster's contempt for rules that he doesn't agree with, yet he expects everyone else to play fairly.

The other day s/he posted a crap 9/11 video breathlessly proclaiming new information re controlled demolition right here in GD knowing full well it would be moved.

Today it's a flame bait election fraud thread.

Amazingly Salon and Mother Jones are to be singled out here but TruthOut will be bitterly defended.

Ideological hypocrisy is appalling when the right does it why is it tolerated here?

[Kurovski]

37. You mean the OP, posted by reprehensor?

And you are aware that reprehensor has posted an article written by another individual?

muddying the waters with other topics is another "good" technique.

Lumping five wide-ranging topics together that each occur under different circumstances, and have many points to be considered each on their own, do not a cohesive ideology make. if you're looking for "lockstep", you're not going to find it at DU, or with the Democrats, for that matter.

What precisely do you find so "smart" about Cocoa's post? autorank has long used caps and colored letters in his own posts, no matter the topic. Do bold letters in a headline always constitute yelling? They are emphasis, they are meant to denote importance and command attention.

Why is it suddenly today construed as yelling?

And as for the other bit of "smart" why shouldn't some tit for tat be part of the argument, considering the condescension and insult that has faced the Election reform movement from the first question about 2004, right up to this day. That's how human beings communicate at times after a year or so of personalized crapola flung their way. Not noble, but that's the way it fucking goes.

So maybe to some, the evidence will finally "become evidence" when enough people look at it and AGREE that it is. It's already happening. That's the nature of reality.

It's difficult to argue with how people view reality, or even choose--for whatever purpose--to view reality. It's best to move forward with that which we DO agree with, rather than endlessly harping on the same personal pet peeve in every post, imagining that if only someone listens to us the movement will take off like a bat out of hell.

Well, the reality is that it is moving. and it will continue to move in the direction of the truth and Democracy despite my--or anyone else's--personal wounds, imagined or real, be they from sincerely unfortune misunderstanding, or purposeful quashing.

If you feel that it's a flame-bait thread, you are free to hit the alert button and explain why you perceive it as such.

As I say, I'm moving on...as of right now.

[iconoclastNYC]

5. I believe both parties use fraud in the primaries

It's harder and harder to ignore the signs that democracy has been neutralized and is now just for show.

[EFerrari]

7. But both parties don't have equal opportunity to commit fraud

so that argument, while I agree with it, seems somewhat collateral to the main issue (or, I guess what seems to me the main issue): the Republican party owns our federal elections by virtue of supplying our voting equipment.

I don't know enough about the companies that are now compiling the mandotory State wide voter registration databases to make an assertion, but I do know the the Liar for my state's Secretary of State forbade the Communications Office receptionist to comment when I asked.

And he took the time to call me back personally to reassure me at length that much of the database was done "in house" and to be as evasive as possible as to who exactly was compiling the database.

[Techno Dog]

19. That's just not true

Republicans don't control the voting process in the United States.

There are as many Democrats making the decisions as republicans at the state level.

[EFerrari]

24. I'd like to see your stats. Plus, they are buying from Republican

vendors. So, already, yes, it is true on the supply side.

[Techno Dog]

25. No

They are buying them from corporations.

Some might by run by republicans but that isn't illegal or anything that can't be mitigated.

How do you ever expect to eliminate the threats if you make this a partisan issue?

[EFerrari]

30. I don't tell Mr. O'dell how to vote, contribute or campaign. n/t

[EFerrari]

26. Of the 10 states with the most electoral votes, R controls

184 where D ccntrols 72. That's comparing the roster of SOS to # of Electoral Votes. Size matters -- and that's one reason they hounded our Dem SOS out of office here in CA.

[EFerrari]

29. FYI: Breakdown by State and totals EV / SOS by party

Rank State Population House Seats Electoral Votes / SOS by Party

1California 36,132,147 53 55 R
2 Texas 22,859,968 32 34 R
3 New York 19,254,630 29 31 R
4 Florida 17,789,864 25 27 R
5 Illinois 12,763,371 19 21 D
6 Pennsylvania 12,429,616 19 21 D
7 Ohio 11,464,042 18 20 R
8 Michigan 10,120,860 15 17 R
9 Georgia 9,072,576 13 15 D
10 New Jersey 8,717,925 13 15 D

D 64 R 184

11 North Carolina 8,683,242 13 15 D
12 Virginia 7,567,465 11 13 D
13 Massachusetts 6,398,743 10 12 D
14 Washington 6,287,759 9 11 R
15 Indiana 6,271,973 9 11 R
16 Tennessee 5,962,959 9 11 D
17 Arizona 5,939,292 8 10 R
18 Missouri 5,800,310 9 11 D
19 Maryland 5,600,388 8 10 R
20 Wisconsin 5,536,201 8 10 D

D 72 R 42



21 Minnesota 5,132,799 8 10 R
22 Colorado 4,665,177 7 9 R
23 Alabama 4,557,808 7 9 D
24 Louisiana 4,523,628 7 9 D
25 South Carolina 4,255,083 6 8 R
26 Kentucky 4,173,405 6 8 R
(n/a) Puerto Rico 3,916,632 * n/a
27 Oregon 3,641,056 5 7 D
28 Oklahoma 3,547,884 5 7 D
29 Connecticut 3,510,297 5 7 D
30 Iowa 2,966,334 5 7 D

D 46 R 35

31 Mississippi 2,921,088 4 6 D
32 Arkansas 2,779,154 4 6 D
33 Kansas 2,744,687 4 6 R
34 Utah 2,469,585 3 5 R
35 Nevada 2,414,807 3 5 R
36 New Mexico 1,928,384 3 5 D
37 West Virginia 1,816,856 3 5 R
38 Nebraska 1,758,787 3 5 R
39 Idaho 1,429,096 2 4 R
40 Maine 1,321,505 2 4 D

D 21 R 30


41 New Hampshire 1,309,940 2 4 D
42 Hawaii 1,275,194 2 4 R
43 Rhode Island 1,076,189 2 4 D
44 Montana 935,670 1 3 R
45 Delaware 843,524 1 3 D
46 South Dakota 775,933 1 3 R
47 Alaska 663,661 1 3 R
48 North Dakota 636,677 1 3 R
49 Vermont 623,050 1 3 D
(n/a) District of Columbia 550,521 3 D
50 Wyoming 509,294 1 3 R

D 17 R 19

D total: 220 R total: 310 6/2006

[Techno Dog]

33. See what I mean?

I bet those numbers surprised you.

And Wally is long gone from diebold.

Thanks for digging out the numbers, if you have the inclination would you take a crack at my last question re strategy?

[johnaries]

36. Dog, you need to do a little research before you post.

Try this forum:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=203

You should also try reading the Conyers Report:
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohiostatusrept1505.pdf

I've read several of your posts in different threads, and it's obvious you try to speak with authority but with little or no knowledge. Please do a little research.

[bettyellen]

39. he comes to damn our threads, not to read them

but yeah, reading would be a start.

[EFerrari]

41. I did. And it's not a matter of "making" this a "partisan issue" but

a matter of observing the obvious. O'Dell is gone. Did he hand the keys over to our leadership? And that's only one of the big three, not to mention their affiliates now working on the databases.

Which isn't the same as how one would build a citizens' coalition to clean up our elections -- mostly because neither party will make an effort to do it. It will have to be done outside of any party framework.

But pretending that Democrats have equal access here is like those media statements that both Thugs and Dems were involved in the Abramhoff scandal. It's simply not true.

And, no, the numbers didn't surprise me as I remember in the early summer of 2004 reading that more than 20 Republican SOSs were also Bush/Cheney campaign heads in their states.

But, it is interesting to see where the Rs have the votes so as to begin thinking about how they will try to leverage them next time. Especially with regard to big blocks, times zones and that kind of thing -- when people like Tweety get on a "when will Gore ever concede" type of roll.

[iconoclastNYC]

28. You don't think Republicans

Would get together with the DLC types that have taken over our party to shut out progressives from the party? There is no way to do this, but it's possible.

[Mnemosyne]

9. K and R! n/t

[Wilms]

10. K&R n/t

[bleever]

11. K&R. Nice distillation of the logic of those dedicated to denying

how voic of credibility the last two presidential elections have been.

:thumbsup:

[gordianot]

13. Many of the victims of the holocaust were sure the Nazi's were not serious

Denial by the victim or victims is not that uncommon in these circumstances. At various times there were many Native Americans who felt they could trust European migrants and invaders.

Of course Liberals you can trust that your votes will be counted on the corporate machines.

[High Plains]

16. Can someone explain why people on the left would deny these

claims? Perhaps they have looked closely at them and came to different conclusions?

The sanctity of the vote is an important issue, of course, but I have to wonder how far off into conspiracy land we've wandered. And I really don't get the people screaming "Diebold, Diebold, Diebold" as if no other issue mattered. How about running a candidate strong enough that it doesn't come down to a handful of votes in Ohio or Florida or wherever>

[Kurovski]

17. I think the fraudsters account for any difference , but I too once thought

that an overwhelming majority would scuttle any theft. Not anymore.

I've read that Dems are afraid that people won't bother to vote if they believe the votes won't be counted. it's as nutty a theory as any conspiracy theory I've ever heard.

Maybe Dem crimes would come to the fore as well, and that's a fear for them? I dunno.

[debbierlus]

20. It is a real problem. Mountains of evidence....

But, it seems that the only thing good enough for some people (even, so called left wingers) is a public confession by the Republican party.

I don't quite understand the refusal to address this...but it is pretty universal.

Perhaps, if people admitted it was that far gone, it would be too much for them to deal with?

I truly don't know.

Logically, it would seem like the election fraud would be the number one issue of the dems this season. But, most of them won't touch it with a ten foot pole.

:shrug:

[Techno Dog]

21. Have you EVER asked an elected Dem about this?

A party chair? A local precinct worker?

If so what did they say?

[Cybergata]

31. Election Fraud

Quote:
"Logically, it would seem like the election fraud would be the number one issue of the dems this season. But, most of them won't touch it with a ten foot pole."

That is probably because they cheated as well, but maybe not as dirty. Everyone was dumbfounded when Nixon was caught cheating, and then a few decades later, everyone seems to have forgotten that cheating in elections is an old tradition in the U.S. Dems or Repubs, it doesn't matter which side it is. Those in power have an easier time at it than those out of power.

[me b zola]

22. k&r

Yeah, the deniers will do so until THEY are prevented from voting or THEIR vote for the Dem candidate keeps showing up as a repub vote. Then they will begin to look around and find that they are only one of hundreds of thousands from their state alone, then they begin to actually read the mountains of evidence that has been compiled by the activists who have selflessly fought to uncover the truth and fight for fair & transparent elections.

[Stevepol]

23. Tto me it comes down to a basic principle, not just statistics.

When the vote is counted in secret by partisans of one side without auditing or recounting by hand to verify that the vote count is accurate, YOU CANNOT HAVE A DEMOCRACY. It's just not possible.

That's the bottom line. If we state that over and over to anybody and everybody who will hear, eventually they will get the message. Until they do, any election can be flipped just like the OH referendum of 05, where the vote fairness initiatives were flipped from 60-40% FOR to 60-40% AGAINST, a 40-point flip.

I'll still vote but it's just an empty ceremony unless people of all parties agree to play by the rules of the game.

[Cybergata]

32. Having piles of absentee ballots...

thrown out in a solid democratic district isn't democracy either. Read Greg Palast's newest book for information and proof. It was even on the news here in Albuquerque that a large number of absentee ballots were missing here in town. All one has to do is challenge an absentee ballot, and it goes in the dumpster. I'm sure that is where mine went.

[0rganism]

34. It's the fallacy of unbearable consequences: i.e., denial from fear

I think a lot of the established Democrats and media-enabled lefties in the USA are absolutely terrified of the consequences of what it means should the election fraud angle be validated.

They're right. They should be afraid. We should ALL be afraid of the consequences. We all have a vested interest in the integrity of the vote, as it is the primary means of public control of the remaining commonwealth.

But the facts remain facts regardless of who suffers because of them. There are plenty of awful truths in the world.

[Kurovski]

38. Kick.(nt)

[deaniac21]

42. Not only is the election fraud evident but these same Diebold

machines are involved in a plot a la 'Terminator 3' to take over the earth and destroy all humankind!

THE SKY IS FALLING!

[librechik]

43. or try to trip up serious calls for investigation by ridiculing them

as crazy "fictionalized" over-reactions.

Like you.

Thanks for the help, "PHT!"

Hope you get "stoned" before you do too much damage--and enjoy your stay!

[deaniac21]

44. Ouch.

I'm sorry that I have an opinion, sniff...

[Kurovski]

45. Kick.

The OP grows more pertinent by the day.