Posted on 09/03/2005 4:26:27 AM PDT by Pharmboy
In describing the results of the ballot study by the group led by the Miami Herald, I relied on the Herald’s own report, which listed only three hypothetical statewide recounts, two of which went to Al Gore. There was, however, a fourth recount, which would have gone to George W. Bush. In this case, the two stricter-standard recounts went to Mr. Bush.
The later study, by a group including the New York Times, used two methods to count ballots: relying on the judgment of a majority of those examining each ballot, or requiring unanimity. Mr. Gore “won” all six hypothetical recounts on the majority basis. He lost one – in this case, the one using the loosest standard – on the unanimity basis.
None of this has any bearing on my original point, which was not that the outcome would have been different if the U.S. Supreme Court had not intervened - the Florida Supreme Court had not, in fact, called for a full statewide manual recount - but that the recorded vote was so close that, when you combine that fact with the effects of vote suppression and ballot design, it becomes reasonably clear that the voters of Florida, as well as those of the United States as a whole, tried to choose Mr. Gore.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Ping...
It's been almost FIVE years Paul, get over it!
...the recorded vote was so close that, when you combine that fact with the effects of vote suppression and ballot design, it becomes reasonably clear that the voters of Florida, as well as those of the United States as a whole, tried to choose Mr. Gore.
Where has Krugman documented the magnitude of vote suppression? Saying votes were suppressed is easy; proving it, more difficult.
As for ballot design, that was entirely a Democratic project. If you shoot yourself in the foot with your own gun and ammo, at least have the balls not to whine about it.
Is this the same "hatchet face", "weasel face" or whatever, that Rush refers to occasionally? Lucky for me, I've never been exposed to him. Until now.
Guess that's what I get for hanging around this place.
:(
Next question!
This again?
As of this past Thursday, I no longer receive the email version of the NYT. Since it was free - I thought what the heck, afterall, I'm not paying them.
However, it was getting harder & harder each morning to stomach whenever I clicked on the page to glance thru the headlines..
Krugman was one of the major reasons why I hate that rag. It got to the point I would only skim their e-headlines. Finally, I decided enough is enough.
I did not want to allow them to count me in their numbers so I finally clicked on "unsubscribe."
My mornings have been a bit more cheery since.
This prissy ivory tower windbag continues the NYT campaign to destroy an educated middle class (their true enemy) so that elitist, wealthy, socialists....mainly living in New York and California, can control America.
Krugman undoubtedly is referring to the panhandle Bush voters that would have gone to the polls had the media not announced before the polls closed that the state had already been decided for Gore
/sarcasm/
"None of this has any bearing on my original point, which was not that the outcome would have been different if
U.S. Supreme Court had not intervened - the Florida Supreme Court had not, in fact, called for a full statewide manual recount - but that the recorded vote was so close that, when you combine that fact with the effects of vote suppression and ballot design, it becomes reasonably clear that the voters of Florida, as well as those of the United States as a whole, tried to choose Mr. Gore."
He had it right up until the point of "Mr. Gore"
Basically, if we put in a National ID system for voting, what Mr. Krugman will find out is that Milwaukee, Chicago, Philly and St. Louis have less people then voters.
If we then add in the military vote that has been supressed, especially in Florida, the 2000 election was not even close.
Paul Krugman is a radical loony left winger. On a scale of 1 to 10, he's a 8.
Unbelievably he still writes for the N.Y.T. as an economist.
Whatever he writes, it is almost always wrong, not only in ideology, but in academics as well.
The best thing Krugman does for normal americans is to understand how far off kilter a liberals mind can go.
He should be on the cartoon page.
That word, "tried," just cracks me up big time......
I put him as an 11 on your scale.
By the way, didja read Krugman's column when he tried to explain how great the French family values are cuz of their long vacations, together?
LOL!
This guy is an unreconstructed Stalinist. The fact that the Times still gives him ink and column space is reason number one not to buy it.
No, Krugman, slightly less than HALF of the state tried to elect Gore.
Krugman undoubtedly is referring to the panhandle Bush voters that would have gone to the polls had the media not announced before the polls closed that the state had already been decided for Gore /sarcasm/
Right, the same media that are filled with bought-and-paid-for Democratic party shills. Refer back to my comment about gun, ammo, foot, whining and balls.
Boy the libs are pulling out every old, useless weapon in their arsenal to stir racial tensions, aren't they?
The only reason I gave him an "8" was because I spend time over at DUmmies website.
Some of those folks over there would make Castro a capitalist on my scale.
It's all about perspective
Not to criticize, but aren't you being a little generous in your assessment? ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.