This letter is associated with the following article:
Letters
Saturday, June 3, 2006 12:00 AM

Was the 2004 election stolen? No.

In Rolling Stone, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. argues that new evidence proves that Bush stole the election. But the evidence he cites isn't new and his argument is filled with distortions and blatant omissions.

Read other letters about this article

  • Monday, June 5, 2006 10:59 AM

    A couple of noticeable oddities

    First, kudos to RFK Jr for re-igniting this needed conversation,

    and shame on Kerry's early concession which really went

    far in sweeping this mess under the rug. Let us, as a nation,

    break from our denial and deal with these massive dilemmas!

    Second, I can appreciate Manjoo's attempt at answering many

    of the important questions raised -- at least he has the guts

    to talk about the problems in depth. However, he is clearly too

    dismissive of those trying to get to the truth, and he stops far

    short of getting there himself. Either he gets lost in a zeal to

    debunk that he seals himself off from objectivity, or he is being

    disingenuous. Neither scenario is good.

    Now, to the oddities:

    1. Manjoo cites average response rates in Kerry vs. Bush strongholds,

    but his numbers don't hold water. The point that Kennedy makes is

    that the strongholds are at least 80% to 20% in favor of one candidate.

    You can't simply say Kerry voters responded 59% of the time and Bush

    voters 53%... and there you have an average 56% response. There would

    be far more Bush voters responding, thus weighting the average response

    rate at that site closer to 53%.

    2. Manjoo's point that the individual state exit polls were within their

    margin of error is disingenous and inconsistent, since Kennedy makes the point that the national exit poll had a margin of error of 1% and the

    discrepancies were far outside of the margin of error (no, not as far as

    Ukraine, but that's irrelevant).

    3. Manjoo uses the well-worn tactic of saying if there was fraud,

    Democrats (and god-forbid African American Democrats!) had to

    be complicit. Perhaps, but we all know well that Democrats (and

    god forbid African American Democrats!) can also be corrupt.

    4. He doesn't even address some of the major points in Kennedy's

    piece, notably the touch screens switching off Kerry votes, among

    many other points.

    It's hopeful to see that this issue hasn't faded away into the aether

    just yet, but we're running out of time before they destroy Ohio election

    documents (September 2006)!

Most Active Letters Threads

740

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
420

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?
408

America's regression

It's almost impossible to find a nation with as many torture advocates as the U.S. has.
332

Palin: Birthers have "fair question" about Obama

Of Obama birth, the ex-governor says, "the public is still, rightfully, making it an issue" (Updated)
211

The poster boy for progressive self-delusion

Read Hayden's 2008 Obama endorsement to remember the way the left sold our centrist president to itself

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon