Poll-ish Joke

Lately, Rolling Stone magazine has been humiliating itself with its political coverage. Not because it's partisan--we expect that--but because it's nutty.

A month ago, it had a feature by Sean Wilentz wondering if Bush was the worst president ever. I thought it would be a while before they beat this childish ("it's happening now so nothing could be more important, and since I don't like him no one could be worse") outburst, but it didn't take long.

The latest edition offers a piece by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who's written a crackpot investigation of the last election. Let me quote him:

The first indication that something was gravely amiss on November 2nd, 2004, was the inexplicable discrepancies between exit polls and actual vote counts. Polls in thirty states weren't just off the mark -- they deviated to an extent that cannot be accounted for by their margin of error. In all but four states, the discrepancy favored President Bush.

The discrepancy he's referring to is the exit polls versus actual results. Now I would have said it favored Kerry--the incorrect exit polls showed him ahead where he wasn't. Kennedy will have none of that. He says we can count on the polls (even though they've been consistently mistaken, he assures us they're an "exact science"), therefore the election results were wrong.

Yep, that's his thesis. Like the polls, don't like the votes? Have the polls decide the victor.

Some believe this article was actually written and published now to hurt the chances of Kenneth Blackwell, Ohio's Secretary of State in 2004 (and therefore involved in voting irregularities) and presently running for Governor. He's a conservative African-American so he must be stopped--if Repubs start getting the black vote, the Dems are doomed. But even though this would only require a two-man conspiracy (Kennedy and RS publisher Jann Wenner)--not the mind-bogglingly large one required to steal a Presidential election on a state-by-state basis--I don't believe it. I believe this is an honest feature from an honest partisan ("honest partisan" in the sense of "I believe any lunacy on my side while even obviously true statements from my opponents are satanic lies.")

PS Since I wrote this, Salon has published a piece that demolishes all of Kennedy's arguments. It shouldn't be necessary, but, alas, it probably is. Kennedy claimed to have carefully examined the evidence, but he must have done it with his eyes closed.

To quote Groucho in Horse Feathers, he's a disgrace to the family name, if such a thing is possible.

PPS Here's another takedown from the Mystery Pollster.