Claims of fraud in NH seem to be premised on the notion that the news media is a competent body

[WilliamPitt]

Seems kinda antithetical to the 43,998,213,932,768,443,554,665,221 DU posts that have pointed out exactly the opposite since January 2001.

But Glenn Greenwald says it better.

===

Brokaw's sudden, embarrassment-driven request for the media to act differently (where has his sermon been for the last 20 years?) will not have the slightest effect on what they do. It can't, because the media stars and their editors and producers who shape coverage aren't capable of anything else. They're selected and in those positions precisely because this is all they're capable of doing.

Are Gloria Borger and Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman and Wolf Blitzer suddenly going to abandon their desire to impose shallow, melodramatic narratives on our elections and spend their time, instead, analyzing the candidates' responses to Charlie Savage's questionnaire on presidential power, or the dominant, corrosive role lobbyists and large corporations play in our political culture, or the widening rich-poor gap, or the strain and stain on our country from our imperial policies? The question is so absurd, so laughable, that to ask it is to answer it. None of them could remotely do that even if they wanted to, even if they were allowed to, and they don't and aren't.

As I wrote the other day after Mike Huckabee's Iowa win, which was preceded by our media geniuses' collective, condescending declarations of his death:

It's a reminder that the political prattle that spews forth from group-think media stars without end and which consumes our political dialogue for a full year is based on absolutely nothing. Also, most predictive "analysis" from the media stars' cousins, the cogs in the right-wing noise machine, is merely self-absorbed wishful thinking masquerading as objective knowledge. . . .

One knows much more by ignoring and tuning all of this out. But for a full year, our mainstream political dialogue is filled with all of this -- in every leading political magazine and news show -- at the expense of anything that is actually real.

But none of this can be different, at least not in the short-term. Our entire media edifice is structured to operate the Drudgian Freak Show and its stars are the ringleaders, chosen for their affinity for it. In that sense, Matthews really is right and Brokaw absurdly wrong, almost delusional. If our media stars ceased spewing the type of worthless (though destructive) chatter that (when directed at Hillary Clinton) has been more apparent in the last week than it has been for a long time, they'd be left with nothing to do. As Matthews says, if they didn't do that, they might as well stay home. It's who they are.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

===

Some other thoughts from Atrios:

Clinton

The Great Orange Satan:

The more she's attacked on personal grounds, the more sympathy that real person will generate, the more votes she'll win from people sending a message to the media and her critics that they've gone way over the line of common decency. You underestimate that sympathy at your own peril. If I found myself half-rooting for her given the crap that was being flung at her, is it any wonder that women turned out in droves to send a message that sexist double-standards were unacceptable? Sure, it took one look at Terry McAuliffe's mug to bring me back down to earth, but most people don't know or care who McAuliffe is. They see people beating the shit out of Clinton for the wrong reasons, they get angry, and they lash back the only way they can -- by voting for her.

I don't know if reaction to the media treatment of Clinton had anything to do with voter choices yesterday, but I certainly know people in real life who a) don't want Clinton to win and b) are tempted to vote for her every time they're exposed to the way she's treated by the deeply broken monsters in our mainstream media.

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2008_01_06_archive.html#2217731319718759591

===

Do you trust the news media to do a good and reputable job of campaign coverage? Do you trust their polling procedures? Do you trust anything they say or do?

If you answser "No," "No," and "No" to the above...well...there you go.

Just a thought. I am ready for my beating now.

[Junkdrawer]

1. Hursti Hack...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2643753

[The Magistrate]

2. Hear Hear, Mr. Pitt!

And also on the proposition pollsters always draw their likely voter screens correctly, and that public sentiment does not vary day by day....

[sinkingfeeling]

3. Excellent article. Thanks, Will.

[blondeatlast]

4. No. No. No. And if I leave no other legacy to DU, I hope my disgust and distrust of

American media lives long after I'm gone.

Spot on-Glen--and thanks for posting this, Will.

[ORDagnabbit]

5. do I trust the tabulation machines.... no.

do I trust the programmers of the tabulation machines..... no

do I trust a hand recount compared to the tabulation machine counts...... yes

[TwilightZone]

6. Some of it seems premised on complete insanity.

Some of the stuff floating around here today is seriously...uh...questionable.

Did you know that the DLC owns all of the media? Just learned that today.

[madrchsod]

7. they rid us of that little elf who see things at the first debate

then after iowa edwards dropped off the map. the media wants obama clinton because it`s their money shot. three ways are just to hard to figure out what to do and to whom...

[Holly_Hobby]

8. Just now, on Tweety's show......

....some woman, I didn't catch her name, said the reason HRC won is because the college kids, profs or staff aren't back at school yet (Obama's base) because NH was forced to have their primary 3 days early. She said Obama's base wasn't back in the state yet. :shrug:

[emanymton]

9. But ... But ... Britney Spears ... Paris Hilton .... Are What You Really

.
want to know about. You told me so. So I tell you.

Besides the people are too numb to take the time to learn anything (The 'news' machines tell us this; would they lie? Would they know?)

'Sell it' is what it is all about.
.

[helderheid]

10. Why do you hate America?

[sam kane]

11. Um, claims of fraud are based on the fact that Obama won the hand-counted

votes in NH. They were rural districts, not known for being highly populated with the young, more liberal population that usually votes for Obama.

Hope that you enjoyed your beating.

[WilliamPitt]

13. Link?

[sam kane]

14. Here is a start:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4009174

[WilliamPitt]

15. No offense intended

but are there links/analyses available that were performed by experts in the field, and not by anonymous DU posters?

Yelling "fraud" is easy, and happens every election now. Doesn't make it true on spec.

Thanks.

P.S. Rural NH Dem voters are likely to be quite to the Left, and therefore unlikely to vote for Hillary. My mother lives in rural NH, and has been active in activism there for years. My data is straight from the clipboards of the canvassers she works with.

[sam kane]

16. Link to voting history of Rural Dems? Thanks.

Here are some non-DU links:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5530

http://www.legitgov.org/nh_machine_vs_paper.html

http://ronrox.com/paulstats.php

[sam kane]

17. Here is the official link:

http://www.sos.nh.gov/presprim2008/index.htm

I have lived in rural and urban New England, and I have never heard anyone claim that the rural areas are *more* left than the urban. The fact your mom's friends are left and that Dixville Notch voted for Obama, makes it more suspicious that their pattern wasn't replicated and extended in the cities.

[ORDagnabbit]

22. so please explain why

why they seem to only poll correctly in hand counted areas. did they only poll in rural areas?

polling to hand counts = correct
exit polling to hand counts = correct


polling to machine counts = error
exit polling to machine counts = error

[progressivebydesign]

26. Oh yes.. the republicans FIXED the machines in a PRIMARY for Hillary.

WOuld those be the same republicans that have hated her guts (almost at the level of the Obama supporters hate for her) for the past decade or so??? Those republicans?? Where, pray tell, would the Clinton camp have access to ALL the voting machines exactly? OMG.. there must be a run on tin foil this week. Every time your "rock star" loses a primary you are going sign up to all the democratic websites and cry about it?

[NobleCynic]

34. Why not?

Polling suggests she's the weakest candidate in the general. In other words, easiest to run against. This whole scenario is dependent on at least some trust in polling. Besides, how many people does it realistically take to rig an electronic vote? The last one to check the code. So... one?

ALSO, inherent to the same claim is that they rigged the vote for Romney in the Republican primary. That the Clinton's had this rigged is not even the primary suggestion here. The claim is that someone rigged both elections.

The sad fact is we are going to face this same claim and doubt every single election until we get rid of electronic voting machines. And as someone who can script, it is a doubt I share.

[sam kane]

41. I am generally a Edwards supporter, who really wanted Clinton to win NH

because I was sick of all of the sexist crap in the media. I completely believed that women came out for her for the same reason.

This weird stuff with the hand counted results v machine counted is so much more important than one state's primary election. When the same thing happens in the general, and we call foul, what do we say when they point out the same thing happen in NH and we did nothing?

The attack on anyone interested in Diebold as an Obama supporter is so tired. What will you all say if/when this happens to Clinton? When everyone attacks you for sour grapes? Did you pay any attention to what happened in Ohio? They aren't subtle, you know. The claims of conspiracy theory and tinfoil just help Diebold, NOT Clinton.

[corkhead]

12. In other words, the NH voters hate the corporatemedia worse than they hate HRC

there may be some truth to that. It also shows how hopeless and meaningless the process is.

[blues90]

19. What ? I don't think it's hate for the media , it's people may vote to get back

at the mud slingers beating down Hillary as their only way to fight back .

I don't believe a damn thing the MSM has to say about anything .

[underpants]

18. Look how they completely missed the effect that corruption would have in 2006

and still to this day refuse to talk about it. They have no idea what is going on outside the castle walls of DC no idea and the people are learning mostly via the internet.

[biermeister]

20. has anyone seen this site?

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

[blondeatlast]

23. Heh, heh, heh. Promoting Bev's site will make you very popular here. Not.

Please for the love of all that is good, read this DU thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=340188

Edit to correct link.

[Radio_Lady]

29. Biermeister, please know that this site and the BBV site have had a past rift.

Someone else can fill you in on the details.

On edit, please go here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2639940&mesg_id=2639940

You could say the person involved is "persona non grata" here.

In peace,

Radio Lady in Oregon

[biermeister]

42. i didn't realize she had a history here

and I don't believe I was promoting her site but regardless. Is anyone aware of another site that is focused on electronic voting machines and possible misrepresentation of the votes?


thanks to all for the heads up

[Uncle Joe]

21. I believe they're competent or could be competent, they're just corrupted.

I strongly disagree with this line.

"It's a reminder that the political prattle that spews forth from group-think media stars without end and which consumes our political dialogue for a full year is based on absolutely nothing."

It is based on something, brain washing the American People at the behest of their owners and CEOs whether it be consciously or subconsciously. I believe the longer this situation persists, the more imperiled our democratic republic will become as the American People are continually dumbed down by the corporate media.

Thanks for the thread, WilliamPitt.

[Gman]

24. "...the way she's treated by the deeply broken monsters in our MSM"

That's nothing compared to what was posted here on DU about her.

Nice writeup.

[progressivebydesign]

25. Atrios also gets it right, and I'll go him one better... Hillary IS a human being.

After probably 16 years of being attacked personally, villified, and trashed at a level no other benign public figure has been (benign meaning a non-evil person who is treated like an enemy since Richard Scaife Melon-head decided to destroy the Clintons in Arkansas decades ago), is it any wonder why women are flocking to Hillary Clinton? You tell me which MALE has been villified to the level Hillary has for the IWR vote? Tell me which spouse of a poltician has been called "pig in a pantsuit", accused of being a lesbian, a murderer, a satanist, and worse. Tell me which MALE child of a politican has called a an "ugly dog" repeatedly in the media. She is a human being who has been treated like a monster for too long, and people are getting tired of it.

It's a man's world. After all the struggles of the feminists decades ago, women are STILL judged by their hip and breast size. Young women have been duped into believing that their sexuality is POWER, it's not... it's just a clever ploy by advertisers to sell more cosmetics and bras, and by men to get you to put out and shut up. You can tell how far backburnered women's power is at any snapshot of American history by the fashion and shoes. Seriously. Women are least powerful when heel heights start towering.. as they are right now. How can a woman run anything wearing 5" heels? How can she be taken seriously with her breasts at front and center, and her lips articially pumped up like a baboon's ass?

Hillary Clinton is being judged by a different standard because she's a woman. The young males who have come into a voting age have been raised by the women who came after the feminist movement.. they've been raised to see women portrayed in video games as victims and hookers, in films as scantily clad crime victims or perpetrators, not powerful women.

Is it any wonder women are finding their voice and speaking out for Hillary? It's not JUST because she's a woman, it's because she's a capable and powerful human being who is being held to a different standard. The ridiculous claims of vote tampering in New Hampshire is only FURTHER solidfying and increasing her support.

[Generator]

27. I think the idea that they are voting just to show the damn awful media

what fakes and horrible propagandists they are is kinda way off base. Because if they actually realized the media were fakes and propagandists then we wouldn't have the shit hole of a country we have now.

We wouldn't have those cretins in power if they had figured out that the media is shit for brains and IGNORE your teevee.

So that leaves:

They voters say they like the black fellow, but they really don't.

The voters really love the crying dame when all is said and done.

They voters lie for fun.


OR it was fixed at the last moment:

Diebold/ie the GOP wants Hillary to win so either; they can smear and destroy her until kingdom come and install smooth hair snake man OR they actually don't mind her winning because at LEAST they know she will continue to play their war games and they can still mock and destroy the last remaining shred of the Democratic party at the same time-win win!

[HEyHEY]

28. Half of that is shit

I work in the MSM and though you can blame management for alot of this crap, such as hiring morons to be media stars, alot of reporters DO know what they're talking about and what they're doing. The problem behind all of this is a skewed view of what people want to see. Focus groups and shit have ruined news because they've been directing the path news takes for too long. Actual skilled reporters that know what issues WILL actually have a serious effect may as well not even show up to work anymore. As for Dowd, she's a backstabbing lil' scumbag for reporting what her co-workers said in her office. Shit like that gets said EVERY FUCKING DAY and nobody means any of it, and it doesn't seep into their writing. Christ, I've heard terrible comments and bad jokes made by reporters I've known to become extremely emotional over other stories. Also, I think the guy can lighten up on Brokaw, so what, Brokaw may be dreamin' but that doesn't mean he isn't right and shouldn't say it. Fuck that shit.

[tandem5]

30. They're also based on the idea that the anger felt...

over the trashing of Clinton's campaign after Iowa can't possibly be real enough to change votes - well it is real and it did happen and to ignore it is an insult to all those that felt it.

[lala_rawraw]

31. excellent post as always

[grizmaster]

32. A wholehearted K & R

Anyone who paid attention in college statistics knows the bloviating pundits revealed they have not a single clue amongst themselves on how to examine polling data correctly.

[noise]

33. Hillary may have won

because of sympathy or because NH voters resented Iowa's outcome or any number of reasons. What I find somewhat annoying is that the explanation of election fraud is rejected so quickly. Sorry but after the BS we've watched the past few years I don't trust these politicians at all. So bring on the 'tinfoil' accusations if you must. I reject it. These voting systems are not secure.

[Emit]

35. No, quite the contrary. It's that they ARE so incompetent that has me curious about the issue.

MSM is just now concerned about election polls and such? What gives?

I don't have access to cable, so I can't tell exactly what's being discussed, but the poll results and such were discussed on Charlie Rose last night, to my dismay, and apparently Tweety is all over it. I read an ABC story on it today.

If they were ignoring it, I may have thought differently. It is the fact that they are bothering to bring it up that makes me think something stinks.

Edited to replace 'are' with 'ARE', for emphasis, you know. ;)

And again to change 'in doubt' to 'curious.'

[Echo In Light]

38. Recommended

[NoFederales]

36. Recommended.

NoFederales

[malaise]

37. Great post with great links

I think the majority of the public are ahead of the media. The lies about Iraq and the 'spin for Bushco' agenda have been exposed. All the polls suggest that people no longer but this bullshit.

[progressoid]

39. Wrong, wrong wrong.

It's 43,998,213,932,768,443,554,665,220 posts.

Jeez, way to over dramatize your point.

[tomp]

40. apples and/or oranges

why can't the media AND the election system be corrupt? why should i not think they are in total cahoots or that there is one force corrupting all politics in the u.s.?

in other words, what's your point?