59 Comments

1. Mike:

I think it’s far more likely that Rather will announce he’s marrying John Kerry, than admit the documents are fakes.

Of course, I could be wrong.

He could announce that John Edwards is his intended.

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:05 am 2. richard mcenroe:

I just posted this at another board where someone was running the “he must still answer the charges” trope…

Rather presented blatantly, badly forged documents to bolster the story of a man whose own daughter says is a liar, and whose own history and movements for the time he talks about contradict his story. Rather refuses to verify the provenance of the documents and insists they were verified by sources he will not name. This would not stand up as evidentiary in the most sordid civil suit or smallest criminal action.

And Bush is supposed to answer these “Charges?”

As someone who has been called a McCarthyite right on this very board, I take the deepest pleasure in asking, “Have you no shame, Dan Rather? Have you no shame?”

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:05 am 3. Knucklehead:

But… but… sputter… but… Look at what Ms. Knox said! The memos are A-C-C-U-R-A-T-E and those Fricken’ Freepers are P-A-R-T-I-S-A-N-S.

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:12 am 4. RattlerGator:

Ladies and gentlemen, authentication shopping, etc., is a classic trial lawyer tactic. In fact, much of this nonsense put forward by the MSM and the Democrats employ classic trial lawyer tactics that don’t require consistency or logic because the focus is on THE OTHER SIDE (plaintiff or prosecutor) with a requirement for consistency or logic.

And who has a trial lawyer on the ticket?

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:19 am 5. ganzo azul:

NY Observer’s article by Joe Hagan

Mr. Rather said that he and his longtime CBS producer, Mary Mapes, had investigated the story for nearly five years, finally convincing a source to give them the National Guard documents. He did not reveal the name of the source, but Mr. Rather said he was a man who had been reluctant to come forth with them because he’d been harassed by political operatives. “Whether one believes it or not, this person believed that he and his family had been harassed and even threatened,” he said. “We were not able to confirm that, but his fear was that what had already been threats, intimidation, if he gave up the documents, could get worse, maybe a lot worse.”

If CBC’s source was Bill Burkett, CBC’s incompetence has done a tremendous injustice to the Kerry campaign first by airing the story, then by stonewalling.

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:44 am 6. FredRum:

NRO’s Kerry Spot has some minimal scoop:

CBS ANNOUNCEMENT: WHATEVER IT IS, IT AIN’T A RETRACTION [09/15 11:35 AM]

Am starting to hear from multiple sources a sense of what’s going on in CBS. There’s some disagreement over what exactly today’s statement is going to be, but the one sense of agreement is that this isn’t a retraction.

The Bush critics are e-mailing CBS, saying “good job, what courage” on this story. According to multiple postersat the liberal chat site DemocraticUnderground.com, the network’s response to the positive emails is:

Dear [e-mailer],

Thank you for taking the time to write. Your support is appreciated. As you can imagine, we’ve been inundated with negative emails. It’s refreshing to hear from a viewer such as yourself. We strive for the highest level of journalistic integrity and will continue to do so, no matter what the cost. A free society demands free, unmuzzled media expression.

CBS Evening News

Also, for what it is worth, the blogger Allah says his source in CBS says today’s announcement will be, essentially, “we still stand by our story.”

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:49 am 7. Sandy P:

Are we surprised CBS is going to the mat on this one?

Blather’s election-night coverage will be very interesting.

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:55 am 8. Michael B:

It’s hard to believe they will “really come clean,” too many factors weigh against an open and honest telling, not the least of which are corporatist/political alliances (money and power) and the personal identities intricately tied to those alliances. I’d expect more defenses and tactics employing misdirection as exemplified by “ganzo azul’s” post above, creating doubts and shadings to help dilute the blatant, Pravda-esque attempt to sway an election and public opinion. (A counter example for contrast: just try to imagine a scenario where Fox would have forged documents to serve to reveal the band-aid quality of John Kerry’s Purple Hearts. The MSM would be all over it for months, even years, on end – and everyone knows this is true.)

Hence it’s the aftershocks of this that are likely to continue to be interesting, the degree to which old MSM/political alliances continue, or continue to erode and reveal increasing signs of stress and fissuring.

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:02 am 9. flenser:

One interesting thing is that it looks as if somebody at CBS is actually reading the email. However, it seems they only acknowledge those from their supporters. I sent them several fairly respectful questions, asking them to provide more information on the background of these memos, without getting any response at all. Is this consistent with everyone else’s experience?

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:19 am 10. Katherine:

Somebody already compared the leftist ìreasoningî that content of the memos counts regardless of their provenance to the belief in authenticity of Protocols of Elders of Zion: ìafter all everybody KNOWS that Jews are taking over the world so the Protocols tell the Truth even if they were forgedî.

I always wondered how is it possible that the Protocols survived the exposure (in my naÔve youth I thought the EVERYBODY knew that they were fake, so case closed), as I always found Holocaust deniers incomprehensible.

Now I observe how it happened. It is fascinating to watch such psychological phenomenon on a mass scale, but it deals a deathblow to my former belief in universal human potential for rationality.

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:19 am 11. Knucklehead:

flenser,

I contacted CBS with two less than supportive (but certainly not screedish) emails and have not heard boo in return.

I guess they are intent on ignoring their critics

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:21 am 12. David Thomson:

ìI guess they are intent on ignoring their criticsî

Be patient. They will surrender by no later than the early part of next week. We just have to be persistent. CBS cannot hide from the Internet bloggers and posters. We have them on the run.

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:30 am 13. chuck:

Katherine:

Now I observe how it happened. It is fascinating to watch such psychological phenomenon on a mass scale, but it deals a deathblow to my former belief in universal human potential for rationality.

The quality involved here is not intelligence or rationality, but morality. I firmly believe that people vary in moral endowment just as they do in intellectual gifts, and they are not the same thing.

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:34 am 14. penwil:

I read a theory once that one of the things that hastened the collapse of the Soviet Union was Chernoble. Not the accident itself so much as the fact that the government and their media kept reporting it as a “minor accident” long after everyone in Russia knew the truth. It was so blatant that people were forced to accept what they’d already long suspected–that the institutions of the country itself were corrupt.

I had a conversation with a very liberal friend last night. This is her view: the documents are not forgeries, they are “reproductions” of memos that “everyone knows” existed at one time, but that “somebody” long ago shredded to protect Bush. Since the country “needs to know” about these memos it was “alright” to use the “reproductions” because they support the “substance” of the “charges” which is Bush was AWOL, disobeyed direct order, fortunate son, blah, blah, blah.

What’s scary is from what I have observed from the woman over the years, she is very much a truthful and honest person in her own life. Her BDS has sent her morality off the rails are far as this is concerned, I guess. Maybe it’s as simple as that with CBS. They knew going in the memos were forged, but the “greater truth” as they see it made it acceptable to use them because the country “needs to know” that “Bush lied.”

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:38 am 15. RogerA:

My guess: CBS continues to stonewall.

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:44 am 16. RattlerGator:

It’s Andrew Gilligan Disease (and maybe worse, but at the very least the same disease Britain’s Hutton Report criticized). Review the link:

http://www.englishandwhite.com/id8.html

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:50 am 17. RogerA:

OT–but to satisfy our style maven, the fair Catherine: http://www.cafepress.com/prestopundit.13540047

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:52 am 18. flenser:

penwil

This behavior has been on display by the left for a long time now. Recall the Florida recount mess. The Dem’s “knew” that Al Gore had won the election. The awkward fact the actual results said otherwise was an annoying detail, to be ironed out in accordance with the “greater truth”. Regardless of how people actually voted, they “knew” that most people wanted their candidate to win. Their refusal to accept reality in that case (and they still have not accepted it to this day) is of a piece with their behavior now. And of course is by itself sufficient reason to keep these people as far as possible from the levers of power.

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:59 am 19. Katherine:

Penwil,

The phenomenon you describe led, in extreme, to Holocaust and Gulag.

They happened because lots of people like your friend who were ìvery much a truthful and honest person in (their) own lifeî suspended their rational and moral judgment for a belief in ìHigher Truthî. Once people convince themselves their message/idea is more important than truth, morality, or real people and the message has to be promoted by any means necessary, all sorts of things can be rationalized: one may start, say, with denying employment to the people who hold ìincorrectî views, and end up with re-education camps.

I agree with chuck that for this to happen there must be something also missing in the morality department. Alas, as we observe there are alarming numbers of people who see nothing wrong perpetrating all sorts of dishonest acts just to advance their agenda.

I am frightened.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:00 am 20. Lola:

Okay . . . it’s now 1pm and no statement. What’s going on over there?

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:00 am 21. Sandy P:

Might have been already posted here, but Tim Blair has this:

Veteran Nashville broadcaster, Teddy Bart on his daily radio show, ìTeddy Bartís Roundtableî may have given us a clue about who knew about the documents nearly a month ago. It appears that Bob Tuke, who was a guest on the show on August 11th knew that something was about to happen with regard to President Bushís alleged failure to show up for a physical examination.

Teddy referenced the episode yesterday (September 9th) when 42:13 seconds into the show he said, ìListeners to the Roundtable will note that something was going to come because Bob Tuke, who is a Nashville attorney and significant in the Kerry campaign in Tennessee, told us about three weeks ago that um there was going to be some document, or implied that there will be a document about Bushís missing time in the Alabama National Guard, in the National Guard, and that somebody was going to come forward with a document. So it did happen, and uh 60 Minutes had it.î

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:00 am 22. Knucklehead:

From Geraghty at TKS:

WAITING FOR THE STATEMENT, [09/15 12:48 PM]

Maybe the announced time for CBS’ latest statement was wrong, but it’s 12:45 pm EST, and nothing, at least according to FOX, CNN, MSNBC, and my e-mailbox. Maybe this statement is being delayed by worried CBS executives.

Joe Allbaugh, who was Bush’s chief of staff when he was governor of Texas, is now being interviewed on Fox. Not much new, “this was all dealt with in campaigns in 1994, 1998, 2000…”

UPDATE: I have now heard from more than one source that CBS is going to talk to 86-year-old Marian Carr Knox, former secretary to Lt. Col. Jerry Killian. Hey, I think it’s great to hear CBS might quote someone who says the memo is fake (other than Marcel Matley, their first expert, who said he could not authenticate it).

They’re going to try to bolster the “content” defense retroactively and, as I mentioned earlier, dare anyone to shred the “nice old lady”; RatherScummy.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:08 am 23. flenser:

The delay in the release of the CBS statement is odd. It may be that they are trying to work in something from Killians secretary to that effect that “these documents accurately reflect how Killian felt”.

She is entitled to her opinion, but it is contradicted by a lot of other people who knew the man. More to the point, the issue now is whether or not these documents were forged, who forged them, and why did CBS publish them knowing they were highly questionable, to say the least. I suspect their spin will be that “we know the documents are an accurate reflection of the reality at the time, so it’s not important if they are actually real or not”.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:10 am 24. Knucklehead:

Flenser,

I’m guessing that you are right. RatherScummy is going to put all their eggs in the “content” basket and get a Grandmother to hold it in her lap on her rocking chair. Its incredibly low, but I’ll bet that’s where they’re going. If they do I hope they get their balls cut off (I only wanted to see them out of business before).

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:16 am 25. flenser:

Knuck

It will be interesting to see the effect of all this on the polls. We’ll probably have to wait another week to see how things play out, but in the meantime, check out the latest polling data, which shows that some states Kerry which should have nailed down are in danger of becoming toss-ups.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/commentary.html

For the first time, I’m getting cautiously optimistic about this thing.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:20 am 26. Katherine:

I am going to confess something: I never liked ìsweet old ladiesî, I too often detect bitter poison coated in all this sugar.

Personally, I intend to become a Granny from Hell.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:22 am 27. Knucklehead:

Flenser,

The polls are one thing, RatherScummy is another. I’m optomistic about the former, pessimistic about the latter. I think CBS is going to fight this tooth and nail and that is, IMO, the stupidest thing they could do. At this point their attempt to turn this DNC dirty trick into a win for Kerry has blown up in their faces and they may just try to recover it lashing Ms. Knox out for the wolves. What a low thing to do, but I think Rather would do it.

Kerry needs to start worrying about hanging on to what was formerly in the bag. That’s why Gore is hitting the road to fundraise and why we’ll see Clinton faint-heartedly (sorry!) host a few dinners.

I’m tellinya, I wouldn’t bet any money on it but I think NJ will be up for grabs before this is over. If Kerry can’t even count on NJ he’s hosed. I saw a poll today (too lazy to look it up again) that said 7 points switched from Kerry to Bush in NY, including The City. There’s no way on Kerry loses NY, but he’s gonna have to do ad buys in the NYC and Philly markets and that’s gonna burn some cash.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:34 am 28. Knucklehead:

Geeze, Katherine, how can you not like Grannies?!? (Oh, never mind, you’re a Republican!)

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:36 am 29. Knucklehead:

How’s this for understatement? Questions About Bush Memos Linger

Uhhh… no, CBS. Farts linger. This thing is like having a skunk die in you attic and fall down into the gap between the walls where you can’t get at it with anything short of a sledgehammer or sawsall.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:40 am 30. Katherine:

Knuck,

I donít mind Hell Grannies. When I hit that status I am going to buy myself a red convertible and be a menace to Police Patrol.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:41 am 31. Knucklehead:

Katherine!

I have a good buddy I need to introduce to you someday. I asked him why he was keeping an old, worn our pocket-rocket motorcycle out in his shed. he said the engine was still good and he was saving it to install on his wheelchair when the time came.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:43 am 32. Godzilla:

Now that the memos have been debunked, when you read this article you can almost hear the internal chuckling coming out of the white house. Bush says he did not defy an order.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:49 am 33. Katherine:

Knuck,

Your buddy and I must coordinate out time on the road one day in the future. However, we will have to remember to send advance notices to all our friends to stay safely away.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:59 am 34. Knucklehead:

Can we call CBS a noshow at this point?

Here’s an interesting article at TCS, What Dan Rather and the Carter Center Need to Learn.

Sep 15, 2004 - 11:07 am 35. Knucklehead:

And LGF reports that Borders’ employees are openly discussing how to hide Unfit For Command and ridicule buyers.

Sep 15, 2004 - 11:11 am 36. Mike:

What is it going to take for the pro-Kerry elements of the MSM to end this charade and admit that they’re not objectively covering this election?

Here’s the final paragraph of this week’s TIME Magazine story on the forgeries controversy, written by Amanda Ripley:

” Will any of this matter come Election Day? The truth is, while Kerry may have taken a hit in the polls as a result of the largely bogus criticism of his war record, Bush, as the incumbent, is not as vulnerable – even if the

accusations are more credible. Americans have spent four years watching Bush as President. Kerry is the unknown, and as with any stranger at the gate, people are wary. What’s more, the breathless debate over typewriter fonts last week shifted the debate away from Bush’s questionable record.”

Unbelievable. One suspects that no matter how badly Rather and CBS are humiliated over this scandal, the fanatics in the MSM will learn nothing from it.

Sep 15, 2004 - 11:11 am 37. Jamie Irons:

Hi to everyone from Mammoth Lakes!

Over the next couple of days I’ll be fly fishing at Hot Creek Ranch. (Close as it is to Nevada, and in spite of what the name may suggest, it’s not that kind of ranch!)

I was checking in at a Mammoth Lakes tea shop with wireless access before “going dark.” (Hot Creek has more trout per mile than any other stream in the US, but it has no internet access!)

I am disheartened that CBS has not yet come clean. (I know, I know — I’m naive!)

Be well!

Jamie Irons

Sep 15, 2004 - 11:46 am 38. Knucklehead:

Mike,

You are probably correct. If we could somehow make the following into a hypothetical question without names or parties attached:

Both candidates for President have questions concerning their military service during the Vietnam war.

A. Candidate Y served with the Air National Guard as a fighter pilot with a unit tasked with Combat Air Patrol to intercept incoming Soviet bomber forces. There are claims that he received special treatment to get into his job, perhaps received inflated evaluations, and failed to take his final physical before being honorably discharged.

B. Candidate Z served with the US Navy and was decorated for bravery and received three purple hearts. Upon returning from the war he was centrally involved with the anti-war movement. There are claims that his medals and purple hearts were awarded under dubious circumstances (he gamed the paperwork system) and that when he returned to the US he actively worked with the North Vietnamese to undermine the US war effort, made false claims of war crimes, pressured veterans and families of POWs to make false statements, and knowingly accepted and repeated false testimony to the US Congress under oath.

You are a journalist 35 years after the fact.

Which claims should be most vigorously investigated:

A. Those against Candidate X

B. Those against Candidate Y

C. Both

D. Neither

If that question could somehow be turned into a pure hypothetical I do not believe that any significant portion of “journalists” would select “A” as the correct answer. B, C, and D are all possible, but not A.

But the MSM and the Moonbats and the Dems can’t see that. They want the answer to be A.

Sep 15, 2004 - 11:47 am 39. Knucklehead:

oops. Of course I meant Y and Z respectively.

Sep 15, 2004 - 11:49 am 40. Catherine:

everyone

I’ve mentioned this before, but liberals don’t like or trust the media any more than conservatives do.

Here’s a passage from the Jay Leno interview linked to on Drudge:

LA Weekly: The media seems to only present the Republican spin and to not present the other side of whatÔøΩs going on.

Leno: I believe the media is in the pocket of the government, and they donÔøΩt do their job. They have people like Michael Moore who do it for them.

LA Weekly: You do believe that the media is in the pocket of the government?

Leno: Yeah, I think to a certain extent. For example, I can watch TV news. If I donÔøΩt like that, I have the option of going to the Internet and picking up what may be fact, may be rumor, may be just raw footage. But at least I have the ability to seek out and get news now where I want to get it, which I never could. Unless youÔøΩre lazy, as most Americans are, you really can get any news you want. Go on the Internet and get raw footage from Iraq right now, because some guy is broadcasting what they donÔøΩt want you to see.

Sep 15, 2004 - 11:49 am 41. Mike G in San Diego:

Katherine wrote: “Somebody already compared the leftist ÔøΩreasoningÔøΩ that content of the memos counts regardless of their provenance to the belief in authenticity of Protocols of Elders of Zion: ‘after all everybody KNOWS that Jews are taking over the world so the Protocols tell the Truth even if they were forged’.”

She may have seen someone else’s comment, or she may have seen mine over at Wizbang:

“Some have expressed doubts, based on certain small, technical points, as to the authenticity of these documents. It may in fact turn out that these particular documents are recreations or secondary copies of the originals. Nevertheless, we stand behind the essential accuracy of our story as a whole, which is corroborated by many witneses and independent pieces of evidence. Indeed, everyone knows that there can be no doubt — none whatsoever! — about the essential truth expressed by the Protocols of the Elders of Zion …”

Sep 15, 2004 - 11:53 am 42. Catherine:

RogerA

I’d Rather be blogging, too!

Anyone else around here wearing GAP jeans?

Sep 15, 2004 - 11:54 am 43. Catherine:

Years ago my husband was involved in creating California “standards” for the teaching of social science & history K-12.

One of his colleagues, a liberal Democrat, wrote a history textbook series that was fantastic, everyone thought.

They had to have meetings with the public all over the state, and everywhere they went they were assailed by left-wing interest groups.

At one meeting a woman got up holding one of the books, and read out loud a passage from the textbook that supported slavery.

In a children’s textbook!

‘Slavery is good.’

(Something like that.)

In this case, the author of the textbook happened to be present, so he, too, stood up and said, “That is a terrible passage to include in any children’s textbook. The only problem is, it’s not in the book.”

The woman’s response was, “No, it’s not, but it could have been.”

True story.

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:03 pm 44. Jamie Irons:

Mike G at 11:54 a.m.

Your post reminded me of something I haven’t yet seen explained: what was the type of the source document of the .pdf’s that CBS first posted?

What I mean is, were they said to have been scanned from photocopies, or what?

This vital point has been vague, at least in my mind.

Jamie Irons

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:12 pm 45. Syl:

OT but I broke down and did a picture of a Right-Wing blogger in Pajamas. I have a Lizardoid Blogger too.

Maybe I’ll do a series and include something to make Dennis happy. LOL

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:19 pm 46. shel:

cute, syl love the dolly!

but was disappointed to see that the computer wasn’t a Mac (I didn’t think, anyway)

geez, we could wait on CBS all day. Guess I better get back to work.

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:24 pm 47. Charlie (Colorado):

Its now 15:35 EDT. Do you know where your CBS statement is?

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:33 pm 48. Fresh Air:

Jamie–

The Fox PDF was almost definitely scanned, using an HP Scanner and authored with HP software.

The USA Today PDF was either scanned, or converted to PDF from an electronic file (most likely scanned) using an Adobe Acrobat 6.0.

The CBS PDF was either scanned, or converted to PDF using Adobe Acrobat plug-in for Windows 5.1.

I don’t think any of this stuff is dispositive, though there is the curious matter of the Feb. 6 date on the Fox PDF, even though it bears a Sept. 10 fax stamp.

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:37 pm 49. Mike:

Knucklehead:

“You are a journalist 35 years after the fact.

Which claims should be most vigorously investigated:

A. Those against Candidate X

B. Those against Candidate Y

C. Both

D. Neither ”

The real fraud being perpetrated on the electorate is the fact that the Rathers of the pro-Kerry media uniformly (and with a straight face to boot!) claim they have engaged in option C., a vigorous investigation of both candidates’ service. It doesn’t matter how many examples like Amanda Ripley’s TIME piece that are put forward. CBS and the rest of the like-minded media will continue to lie and deny until these lies and denials become untenable.

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:41 pm 50. Rick Ballard:

“what was the type of the source document”

Jamie,

It’s very hard to say but the partialy erased phrase:

Word2000 is a regis

may provide a hint.

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:48 pm 51. Knucklehead:

Mike,

I understand that they believe they’ve chosen “C”. I’m also pretty sure that when the histories are written 25 years hence it will be clear that they chose “A” overwhelmingly. Self-delusion.

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:49 pm 52. Jamie Irons:

Fresh Air

Thanks!

Rick

Funny, as usual.

Now that you’re out of the bat cave, what’s your take on Kerry’s electoral chances at this moment? (Asked with straight face.)

Jamie Irons

Sep 15, 2004 - 12:53 pm 53. Charlie (Colorado):

Over the next couple of days I’ll be fly fishing at Hot Creek Ranch. (Close as it is to Nevada, and in spite of what the name may suggest, it’s not that kind of ranch!)

Goddamn showoffs.

Sep 15, 2004 - 1:00 pm 54. Syl:

shel Thanks!

———-

Recent correspondence with my 80-year old mom in CT:

Me: [an aside in an email about medical stuff, hurricanes, my cat, etc.] Did you hear about Dan Rather and Sixty Minutes using fake memos to attack Bush’s National Guard service? Wooowie, what a scandal it’s becoming.

Mom’s response: I had to laugh at your reaction to the CBS news about Bush’s service in the National Guard. Where were you when the Bush team was smearing Kerry’s service and wounds in the Viet Nam War? I’ll be glad when the elections are over. The issues are what interest me, like Bush’s War in Iraq and the way Social Security is being scrapped in order to get the money into Wall Street, etc. etc..You and I will never see eye to eye on the politics going on today – you hear what you want to hear and I do the same, so don’t bring up the subject to me anymore. You listen only to the Far Right expounders and I avoid them like the plague.

Emphasis mine.

Sigh.

BTW, I consider email public, not private, but this is the first time (I remember, anyway) that I’ve quoted email without permission. So be it.

Sep 15, 2004 - 1:14 pm 55. Rick Ballard:

Jamie,

I haven’t thought much about the electoral vote side. I do believe that the battleground is down to six or at most eight states now. People keep focusing on the Gore vote in ‘00 and ignoring the ‘02 election. I believe that the ‘02 election was historical in nature and perhaps moreso than the ‘04 election will be. The ‘02 documented the 5% Republican shift and may have understated it. Many pundits put states that Gore won by more than 10% in the “safe” column. I don’t believe that to be true. I also don’t believe that most polling is reflecting that 5% shift at all. Using out of date sample weighting allows a false perception to be widely dissemninated. If you shift the sample by 5% suddenly you have a different electoral map. I really don’t have a feel for the Dem stay at home yet. Kerry has inspired the lowest level of loyalty that I’ve seen so it is very hard to judge where this will wind up.

Watch the campaigns, if Kerry starts spending time in NJ and/or CA then we could see W over 400 on Nov. 2.

I’ll look over the splits while you’re “fishing” (be sure that you buy the freshest “evidence” available before you head home). If you forget to cash all your chips, just throw them away, it’s safer.

Sep 15, 2004 - 2:02 pm 56. Jamie Irons:

Rick

Thanks! As you often do, you manage to be cogently analytical and funny in the same post!

Don’t worry…Nina won’t be looking for “evidence,” fresh or not, as she knows I never catch anything. And since Hot Creek is catch and release anyhow, assuming a miracle occurs and I land one, I’ll have to toss it back!

Jamie Irons

Sep 15, 2004 - 2:12 pm 57. Catherine:

Rick B

I also don’t believe that most polling is reflecting that 5% shift at all. Using out of date sample weighting allows a false perception to be widely dissemninatedshould have found based on previous polling, right?

So you’re endorsing Dick Morris’s argument about this?

Sep 15, 2004 - 2:49 pm 58. Catherine:

Well, that last post may be an indication that I, for one, typically do use preview.

Sep 15, 2004 - 2:53 pm 59. Catherine:

Syl

I love the blogger in pajamas!

Sorry about your mom.

Older folks just loathe the guy.

My own mom, who is a naturally cheerful person, gets a tone of real venom in her voice when the subject of George Bush comes up.

A friend of mine said her own 80-year old mom told her George Bush “should be assassinated.”

Assassinated!

This is an 80-year old woman with major health problems.

I find that bizarre.

Sep 15, 2004 - 2:55 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: