Friday, October 22, 2004
Election fraud 2004: Krugman sets the baseline
Not shrill, not shrill at all:
I would be more, well, shrill about it: There's no reason to accept a narrow Bush win as legitimate, especially if Bush's margin of 'victory' is smaller than the number that we already know have been illegally disenfranchised from Florida 2000.
So, for all our sakes, let's work for a convincing Kerry win, for decisive repudiation by reality-based America of all that Bush is, and all that Bush stands for. I'm taking November 2 off to GOTV. Are you?
But we must not repeat the mistake of 2000 by refusing to acknowledge the possibility that a narrow Bush win, especially if it depends on Florida, rests on the systematic disenfranchisement of minority voters. And the media must not treat such a suspect win as a validation of skewed reporting that has consistently overstated Mr. Bush's popular support.
(via Times)
I would be more, well, shrill about it: There's no reason to accept a narrow Bush win as legitimate, especially if Bush's margin of 'victory' is smaller than the number that we already know have been illegally disenfranchised from Florida 2000.
So, for all our sakes, let's work for a convincing Kerry win, for decisive repudiation by reality-based America of all that Bush is, and all that Bush stands for. I'm taking November 2 off to GOTV. Are you?
