I am sitting in an airport going standby so I have time to summarize
it.
The liberal blog starts with a plausible account of how a Chicago Democrat
election official commits election fraud by "finding 14,000 votes in a
machine-controlled ward." He then says regarding Wisc that a county
"forgot to count Brookfield," because the county clerk "lost the Brookfield
results in her computer" but later "found 7,582 votes." There is really no other
material facts presented, but a very elaborate justification made for suspicion
based on the partisan and personal activity of the Republican clerk and the
fact that the number "found" means there is no free recount.
But the J-S, the very liberal Milwaukee paper, adds the following. that the
clerk of Brookfield had sent the results of Brookfield voting to the county
clerk twice, that the county clerk failed to save the Brookfield totals in her
computer (where she was compiling the results), and that, as a result, the
Brookfield totals were not included in the tally. When the county clerk
discovered the error, they verified all of the totals and announced the new
numbers. The Democrat member of the election board said, of the new totals,
"they're correct."
So the combination of a plausible hypothetical that he compares this with
with very elaborate facts, with use of an ambiguous description of what happened
(used "finding" and "found" "votes" which could mean found new ballots,
etc.), with failure to provide material facts and with an underlying
assumption that partisans would lie and steal to win elections (projection here
I thnk), leads to a very misleading report. Very clever, but frankly
boardering on dishonest. Jim Bopp
In a message dated 4/8/2011 2:08:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jeffhauser@gmail.com writes:
I think
the Journal-Sentinel piece is pretty solid and that the Nichols piece, which
is not exactly hiding that it comes from a point of view, is also pretty
solid. I also think the two pieces agree on all overlapping
topics.
So, Jim, what are you saying is inaccurate in the Nichols
piece?
(I hope "disconnected from reality" implies "inaccuracy;" I
would never accuse someone who gets their facts right of being disconnected
from reality, which is a seriously strong charge)