Posted on 01/10/2008 7:09:13 AM PST by jdm
After watching the Democrats spin wild conspiracy theories about how they lost the 2000 and the 2004 elections, it shouldn't surprise that similar paranoid thinking has arisen in 2008. However, this time the target of the conspiracy thinking isn't Republicans, but other Democrats. Progressive bloggers have begun launching accusations of fraud and vote-rigging in the wake of Hillary Clinton's surprise victory in New Hampshire's primaries:
The results weren't even in when the blogosphere started to hum with a theory that sharply divided Democrats online: Barack Obama lost to Hillary Rodham Clinton in New Hampshire because the vote was rigged."Something stinks in New Hampshire," a commenter posted on the popular liberal site Americablog.com.
Curious about the "wildly inaccurate" polls that put Mr. Obama in a double-digit lead going into Tuesday's primary, blogger Brad Friedman, a Los Angeles-based election-fraud watchdog, questioned the results as soon as they arrived, and all day Wednesday.
"Other folks that I've spoken to, who follow this sort of thing, share my concern at this hour," he wrote on bradblog.com. "If I was Barack Obama, I'd certainly not have conceded this election this quickly. I'm not quite sure what he was thinking."
I'd make one criticism of Karen Brooks in this instance. She shouldn't hold John Aravosis responsible for the opinion of a commenter at Americablog. If John has made these allegations, as Brad did at Bradblog, then Brooks can rightly use that as an example. If John didn't write the comment, then it's a bit unfair to show him as a purveyor of this charge. The same holds true at Crooks and Liars, where it appears that Brooks surveyed the comments and not the posts.
The conspiracies have popped up in my threads as well among the supporters of Ron Paul. They're claiming that their fifth-place finish springs from a Diebold conspiracy to discredit their candidate. Paul and his crew have a long history of conspiracy theorizing, and Paul himself appears regularly on the Alex Jones radio show, which lives off of them. Just because those comments appear on my site doesn't mean I agree with them, and as far as I know, no one else on the Right outside of the Ronulans have given it a second thought.
Mostly, this is a debate taking places on the fringe of the progressive blogosphere and primarily among commenters. It's still amusing to see it, however, because if one follows the conspiracy theory to its natural conclusion, it indicts the Democrats' biggest assets. Who benefitted from this alleged vote rigging? Bill and Hillary Clinton. It mirrors the conspiracy mongering on the Right during the 1990s involving Bill and Hillary, at least on the fringes. It makes it harder for the Left to castigate conservatives over the real phenomenon of Clinton Derangement Syndrome when their own allies suffer from it.
Danny Glover notes at Beltway Blogroll that none of the campaigns have floated the notion of fraud. I also notice that the one group that would most benefit from that explanation -- pollsters-- have not mentioned it as a reason for the surprise Hillary win. Will that make a difference for those who see wheels within wheels everywhere they look? Probably not.
One of the things the MSM is ignoring is the fact if you lay down with fringe kooks, right or left, the blowback when you piss them off is staggering.
Its telling the MSM gave the far leftwingnuts of dailykos and huffingtonpost so much air play - and credit - in 2006, but aren’t saying much of anything about them TODAY.
Why? Because they are angry with the Democrats front runner, Hillary Clinton.
If nothing else, the Bush Era has put to rest the quaint notion that the MSM isn’t hardcore liberal in its point of view.
That's the first thing I thought. The Clintons pretty much control the party apparatus. I think word went out that Hillary was NOT going to lose New Hampshire.
I think the lax standards played a role in Clinton’s margin of victory, but not the victory itself. Just a guess on my part.
I’m certain that the accusers would tell you that this is an unprecedent event — that Democrats have never engaged in voter fraud before.
Has anyone seen this Michael Eric Dyson character? This guy is unreal. Sees “racism” in every shadow and under every rock. And he makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Just blurts about “Hillary used the morse code of racism” and “calculus of negrophobia” (whatever that means). I thought Cornell West was a hoot, but this Dyson guy takes the cake. And of course the MSM treats him with the utmost respect.
My current assessment of the MSM isn’t one of leftwing or conservative bias. It is more megalomaniacal than anything else.
1. The MSM has moved from being the guardian of public opinion and conscience to seeing themselves as the developers and purveyors of the such. With absolutely no consultation, they have anointed themselves as a substitute for the “great unwashed” instead of standing as the buffer they used to be.
2. The MSM’s only desire is to topple US authority figures/icons regardless of ideology. The more powerful the better for them. They dogged Clinton, they dog Bush, if they see a candidate resonating with the people, they attack. They see themselves as St. George ready to slay any (political) dragon they see; all the better to claim a position of either “dragon slayer” or “king maker”.
I see it as a full-court press: fake tears, media complicity, registration fraud, ballot fraud, and manipulation of the Diebold databases. They add up.
Pros know how to add. The Clintons are pros.
Bada Ping!
‘The MSM’s only desire is to topple US authority figures/icons regardless of ideology’
If that was true, Gore would have been a sitting President running for office in 2000.
The MSM did everything they could think of to keep Clinton in the Whitehouse after his Impeachement by the House, remember?
And unfortunately, we had Trent ‘Spineless’ Lott as SML, and he refused to allow a full, public hearing complete with evidence and witnesses to proceed.
He is a pro, she’s learning on the job.
Don’ really care how they did it....the Democrats are paving the way for ANY Republican candidate. I don’t believe
Americans will vote for Hilary or Obama.
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.