Friday, August 19, 2005

On Our Bipartisan History of Dirty Elections

Information about the "dirtiness" of the last two presidential elections has long been available on the internet and it is beginning to come to light in the mainstream media. Paul Krugman's editorial "What They Did Last Fall" in today's New York Times is a good example.

Krugman reviews Andrew Gumbel's book "Steal This Vote." Here are a couple paragraphs from Krugman's editorial:
Mr. Gumbel throws cold water on those who take the discrepancy between the exit polls and the final result as evidence of a stolen election. (I told you it's a judicious book.) He also seems, on first reading, to play down what happened in Ohio. But the theme of his book is that America has a long, bipartisan history of dirty elections.

He told me that he wasn't brushing off the serious problems in Ohio, but that "this is what American democracy typically looks like, especially in a presidential election in a battleground state that is controlled substantially by one party."

That this country has a "long, bipartisan history of dirty elections" has been an open secret for quite some time. Larry Sabato's book "Dirty Little Secrets" ably documented that fact long before the 2000 election.

The difference between earlier instances of corruption and voter fraud and the instances in the last two presidential elections is the internet. In earlier eras the mainstream media could ignore the fraud and corruption and the public remained uninformed about it for generations. That is no longer the case. Those who know where to look on the internet and who have the discernment to distinguish partisan ranting from thoughtful analysis have long known about the illegitimate methods by which this administration came to power.

It is good to see the mainstream media publishing more about the "dirty little secrets" that they've long been withholding from the public.

4 comments:

MsPenni said...

With technology the way it is , it just amazes me that every state has its own way of voting. NM has electronic, while florida has hole punch, and here in Canton we have paper. There needs to be one form of voting nation wide and one set of rules on counting.
It has been a well known fact that the electoral college has never been the true voice of the american voters. That should have been abolished in the 1950's.
Just one more way for the politician to steal an office.

Greek Shadow said...

The only alternative to the electoral college is like what we have for mayor's races. A Primary where every Tom, Dick and Nutjob runs for office and then a run off election between the two top vote getters. When a city has to do two elections it doesn't run up that much of a tab, but to try that on a national scale would be rather difficult. The electoral college keeps us a two party (for better or for worse) political system, and I feel that is better than the Parliamentary system where you have to have coalition governments and everyone is splintered into fifty or sixty parties.

greg said...

I'm surprised the article didn't reference Mark Miller's "None Dare Call It Stolen" in last month's Harper's. And excellent piece of work running down all that happened in Ohio.

Dr. Bruce Prescott said...

Greg,

Sometimes you've got to let the facts sink in one at a time.