Two different news media consortiums reviewed Florida's ballots; both found that a full manual recount would have given the election to Mr. Gore. This was true despite a host of efforts by state and local officials to suppress likely Gore votes, most notably Ms. Harris's "felon purge," which disenfranchised large numbers of valid voters.
Notice Krugman is careful not to reference who the "two different news media consortiums" are? Here's why.
According to CNN:
If a recount of Florida's disputed votes in last year's close presidential election had been allowed to proceed by the U.S. Supreme Court, Republican George W. Bush still would have won the White House, two newspapers reported Wednesday.
The Miami Herald and USA Today conducted a comprehensive review of 64,248 "undercounted" ballots in Florida's 67 counties that ended last month.
The other study had similar findings:
A comprehensive study of the 2000 presidential election in Florida suggests that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a statewide vote recount to proceed, Republican candidate George W. Bush would still have been elected president.
The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago conducted the six-month study for a consortium of eight news media companies [...]
I look forward to the NYT's correction of Krugman's fantasy.
Krugman goes on to take a look at the 2004 elections and mimics the Democrats talking points that Democratic voters were surpressed. Krugman must have missed the Democrats own report that found wide spread voter fraud - by Democrats!
How can a paper of the New York Times stature, let such nonsense into their paper? Because they are biased to the Left beyond belief.
UPDATE
Here is a copy of an email I sent to Krugman and the editor of the NYT.
Sir, I trust you will be taking action to correct this bit of fiction by Mr. Krugman.
Mr. Krugman makes this absurd and false claim:
“And he documents the simple truth: "Al Gore won the 2000 presidential election."
Two different news media consortiums reviewed Florida's ballots; both found that a full manual recount would have given the election to Mr. Gore.”
Mr. Krugman was careful not to reference who the “two different news media consortiums” were. Now why would that be?
Here are two major studies that prove Bush won Florida and the 2000 election:
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/04/04/florida.recount.01/
And
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html
Mr. Krugman goes on to mimic Democratic talking points that Republicans were involved in voter suppression in the 2004 elections. What Mr. Krugman fails to tell the public is several studies, including one by the Democrats themselves, found widespread voter fraud was committed in the 2004 elections – by the Democrats!
See here for a round up of voter fraud by the Democrats. http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2005/08/america-voter-suppersion-by-democrats.html
Mr. Krugman should be ashamed of himself for trying to pull this fraud on the American public and you should be ashamed for allowing him to publish it. Further you should fire Mr. Krugman for such deceit.
As the saying goes, everyone is entitled to their own opinion but no one is entitled to their own facts.
Articles like Mr. Krugman’s is why newspaper circulation in the US is in such steep decline. It is too easy to fact check such nonsense and find the truth. And once you find out you’ve been conned, you lose credibility with your readers. Credibility is something you can’t afford to lose. Mr. Krugman is.
Sincerely,
I'll let you know if I get a reply from either.
You can email Mr. Krugman here: krugman@nytimes.com and The NYT here: public@nytimes.com
UPDATE
More here including a report from Krugman's own newspaper noting Bush won the election not Gore.
Watch for a blogswarm on this one.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment