Politics

[bobquasit]

I've been making some lengthy comments - posts, really - on the Democrats blog, if anyone is interested.

First thread (now closed).

Second thread (still open).

The posts are made under my own name, so just search the pages for "Peter" or "Maranci". I assume that no one from the Democratic Party is actually reading the goddamned thing, of course.

Hmm, I just noticed that these are secured sites, so you may need to actually register in order to read them. If that's the case, maybe I'll post the text here sometime - although I'd probably have to start a Politics filter, I guess.

Comments

[charibdis.livejournal.com]

When you say we only have to persuade a few percent of the masses to vote for non-republicans you assume, in my opinion incorrectly so, that those votes you changed will be counted accurately.

Indications are very strong that this was not the case in either the 2000 elections or those of 2004, and bringing more voters intot the fold isn't going to change how accurately those votes are or are not counted.

[klyfix.livejournal.com]

If you mean the exit polls, there's an interesting bit at The Washington Monthly's blog. It appears that exit polls just about always wildly exaggerate the results for the Democrat, and it is just not true that exit polls are particularly accurate. Also note that the exit pollsters don't discuss their methodology. Basically, well, there really doesn't seem to be all that much justification for the "We wuz robbed!" idea this time.