You people REALLY have it out for Farhad Manjoo, don't you? Why?

If you read the article again, you might realize that Manjoo is neither angry nor particularly smug. The allegations raised in Crispin Miller's accounts are not solid, and he isn't able to answer any requests for proof. Manjoo doesn't have to go out of his way to document that these allegations are flimsy - it doesn't take much to topple them. Even if there is an element of truth behind them, they need to be backed up with something more than mere suspicion. Providing flimsy evidence (or misquoting John Kerry - or was that a flip-flop?) just makes those of us who think the election WAS stolen look like conspriacy theorists.

That's the point. Not that the election wasn't stolen. Just that so far, no one has been able to offer an iota of proof that it has - and that showing "bad proof" is more damaging than showing no proof at all.

Keep it up, Farhad. You're my guy.

1. this is the most important thing farhad manjoo said in this article:

Thus, "Fooled Again" probably isn't going to go away. This is not good news for anyone who cares about the sanctity of American elections. The fact is that the machinery of American democracy is broken; mistakes, inaccuracies, chicaneries, snafus, frauds, fiascoes and disasters debilitate almost every race everywhere every two years, with the result that increasing numbers of Americans report feeling alienated by the voting process. It's no exaggeration to say the problem has reached the level of a national emergency.

But by putting forth exaggerated and easily disputable theories of election theft, "Fooled Again" undermines the entire reform endeavor, tying the legitimate need to fix things to the less laudable, fringe-left goal of mercilessly bashing Bush. If you want to improve how Americans vote, here's one piece of advice: Don't alienate half the country by arguing, as Miller does here, that the president and his followers -- whom Miller labels "Busheviks" -- think of their political enemies as "subhuman beings," and believe they must "slaughter" their opponents in the same way that religious fanatics slaughter their holy foes. Even if you believe this to be true, and even if it is in fact true, shut up about it; this sort of unhinged rhetoric can't help, and can only hurt, our capacity to solve the problem of voting in America.

this is opinion. strong, dismissive, argument-inducing opinion. i do happen to agree. i also think those who attack manjoo's writing have failed to read carefully and to drink in the intelligence of his rigorous standards for critique, and are getting impaled on his snarky "shut up" attitude.

2. editors: please find an anti-manjoo letter and make it an editor's choice. preferably a smart one that is not a juvenile smear, but you have to choose one or more or the defences of his work look looney and ... uh ... partisan.

3. very sorry to make this letter-posting anon! due to my employer, and my own internal conflict about posting this during work hours, it is not possible for me to use my name. in general, it looks like shit to have anon support of salon writers. like it might be their moms, dads or co-workers. so this letter should definitely not get an editor's star. it pains me.

keep up the quest for truth and reform, manjoo! a little less snark might get you less nastyware in response, but your basic take on the situation is laudible, and clearly you care about fairness.

Dear Salon,

For me, this "Ohio Problem," existed before the election. It was widely known that The Secretary of State in Ohio was refusing thousands of voter applicants at least three months before the election. These were all from poor minority and traditional Democrat voting districts. His methodology was to present a piece of legislation to the Ohio State Legislative body. Thus, for me, this is a part and parcel of the overarching techniques employed accross the USA where the Republicans could force such legislation or Administrative mandates. Thusly we have the germination of the "Problem in Ohio." This story came from the Detroit Free Press. I was so angered by this that I wrote Sec. Blackwell as email letter and of course recieved no return reply. Nevertheless, as the voting that fateful night opened up, and Ohio was the crucible that spawned another four years for "you know who," I was shouting mad. For me it was that Sec. Blackwell was acting as a race traitor, disenfrachising his whole people in order to ensure the election, at least in Ohio, for the good ole' boys from Crawford. I seriously doubt the voting machine rigging story, why would the Republicans take the chance at fraud when they had already moved in several states to prevent the poor and minorities from voting for their most obvious choice through either Adminstrative or Legislative methods. Unfortunately for me, the Presidential election process is seriously flawed, election college, etc, and thusly should be repaired in the next Administration, if these United States exists as it does today in the next Presidential election cycle.

I am amazed that of the fifteen odd letters, the four chosen as Editor's choice for this article, are booster pitches for Farhad Manjoo.

And frankly I am astonished that Farhad Manjoo is still allowed to cover election fraud issues. He has been so tendencious and didactic in his dismissal of any notion that fraud may have taken place, that quite frankly, I believe he protests too much.

Why has Mr. Manjoo decided a priori that election fraud in a presidential election is an impossibility? It has before happened - among other places, in Chicago in 1960 when Democrat John F. Kennedy defeated Richard Nixon. It appears to have happened in 2000 in Florida with the personal intervention of G.W. Bush's brother's handpicked officials. It appears to have happened in 2004 with a huge discrepancy between exit polls (showing Kerry up more than three percent) and final results in Ohio, New Mexico and several other swing states.

The specious reasoning involved in explaining those exit poll numbers is mind-boggling:

• Bush people work longer and harder than Kerry supporters so they come to vote later, after the pollsters are gone
  (Kerry supporters and Democrats don't work?).
• Bush people are proud and secretive and won't talk to pollsters
  (more often loud-mouthed braggarts who can't wait to shove their vote in your face).
• The pollsters are young people and want to talk to other young people
  (hello, these are trained and briefed pollsters working according to established field-proven methods - did they suddenly decide this year that they were on a camping trip to make election day friends?).

The electronic voting machines can be tampered with. Election results would suggest that they were tampered with. At this point, the burden of proof ought to shift to the Fahrad Manjoo camp to prove that there was no tampering.

But no, Mr. Manjoo has had his mind made up for a long time. Frankly, I don't want to read another of his dismissive and condescending articles on the subject. Like Bill Batten I think

Fahrad Manjoo should be retired from this brief. I sympathize with Robert Sterling's position - articles like this make me regret my Salon subscription. The right-wing talking heads numerous enough that we don't need to sponsor another one here. These Manjoo election fraud articles remind me of the Republican apologists in a Tom Tomorrow cartoon.

Both of the above letters are a great deal more deserving of being an Editor's Choice than the backslapping tripe in support of Fahrad Manjoo you have chosen.

Others have suggested it, and I will too - the recently released GAO (Government Accountability Office) report was highly damning of the 2004 process and by implication results. Apparently there have been with referendum results which are widely the contrary of survey polls - on issues - like campaign finance - which matter a lot to the Republicans.

With Fahrad Manjoo's free pass for election fraud (John Kerry is to be seriously faulted for not questioning the results at the time), you are making the blighters even bolder.

Wake up and put a real reporter on this beat.

Salon should be at the forefront of demanding a paper trail and paper recounts, not the leading whitewash and election fraud cover apologist.

Sincerely.

(For those who would like to support verified voting - there is verifiedvoting.org. For more information on the GAO study of the 2004 election and recent Ohio results, there is a great deal of information available at the freepress.org at www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1559)