I can't believe I beat Desh to this....

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122644940271419147.html

I am calling shenanigans!

"When Minnesotans woke up last Wednesday, Republican Senator Norm Coleman led Mr. Franken by 725 votes. By that evening, he was ahead by only 477. As of yesterday, Mr. Coleman's margin stood at 206. This lopsided bleeding of Republican votes is passing strange considering that the official recount hasn't even begun."

"For example, there was Friday night's announcement by Minneapolis's director of elections that she'd forgotten to count 32 absentee ballots in her car"

"Up in Two Harbors, another liberal outpost, Mr. Franken picked up an additional 246 votes. In Partridge Township, he racked up another 100. Election officials in both places claim they initially miscommunicated the numbers. Odd, because in the Two Harbors precinct, none of the other contests recorded any changes in their vote totals."

Wow.... looks like the Dems are trying to steal a seat...

 

[evince]

Yeah that must be it.

Just like in Alaska right now.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Yeah that must be it.

Just like in Alaska right now.

LMAO... so you don't see anything odd about this Desh? Amazing how you never do when it is a Dem involved.

 

[Bonestorm]

The Wall Street Journal Opinion Page is a stinking cesspool, particularly the unsigned editorials. You would be well-advised to ignore much of what appears there.

 

[uscitizen]

SF did not post the part of the article where there is going to be a recount did he?

I read about this a a day or so ago.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

The Wall Street Journal Opinion Page is a stinking cesspool, particularly the unsigned editorials. You would be well-advised to ignore much of what appears there.

So the numbers they reported aren't accurate?

So your attempt is to once again attack the messanger of the story rather than address the points it brings up? Why is that Dung? Do you have something that shows the numbers they use aren't correct?

 

[evince]

LMAO... so you don't see anything odd about this Desh? Amazing how you never do when it is a Dem involved.

Absentee ballots can be completetly verified.

Is she an asshole for forgetting them in her car? you bet

 

[Bonestorm]

So the numbers they reported aren't accurate?

So your attempt is to once again attack the messanger of the story rather than address the points it brings up? Why is that Dung? Do you have something that shows the numbers they use aren't correct?

Why should I debate something that, even if true, doesn't fucking matter one iota and will have zero impact on the outcome of the election?

The thing is going to a statewide recount.

Oh, and I attack the messenger when the messenger is a known dissembler and the most hacktackular of editorial boards in the country.

 

[cawacko]

The Wall Street Journal Opinion Page is a stinking cesspool, particularly the unsigned editorials. You would be well-advised to ignore much of what appears there.

Besides having a libertarian/conservative bent what problem do you have with the Journal's editorial section?

 

[Bonestorm]

Besides having a libertarian/conservative bent what problem do you have with the Journal's editorial section?

Other than the fact that they're completely full of shit? Nothing.

 

[uscitizen]

The WSJ sure did see the finiancial mess coming long ago didn't they DH ?

The wsj serves the finiancial industry and it was to the finiancial industry's benefit to keep a false positive outlook in opposition to the face of reality.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Besides having a libertarian/conservative bent what problem do you have with the Journal's editorial section?

It isn't moveon.moron or commondreams.hacks so it obviously must not be 'quality'

 

[cawacko]

Other than the fact that they're completely full of shit? Nothing.

Is there any right leaning editiorial board or site that you believe is not full of shit?

 

[Bonestorm]

Is there any right leaning editiorial board or site that you believe is not full of shit?

Cawacko - I'm not making this stuff up. They're full of shit. Liars. Hacks. Dissemblers. Really. Look it up. And they're not "right-leaning," they're hardcore right-wing corporatists. It's basically Sean Hannity stuff.

The news pages are first rate. They opinion page, and in particular the unsigned editorials, are usually complete horseshit.


Edit - I generally ignore editorials altogether. Some are better than others. Most are at least honest albeit biased. The Wall Street Journal is extremely biased and extremely dishonest, not a good combination.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Cawacko - I'm not making this stuff up. They're full of shit. Liars. Hacks. Dissemblers. Really. Look it up. And they're not "right-leaning," they're hardcore right-wing corporatists. It's basically Sean Hannity stuff.

The news pages are first rate. They opinion page, and in particular the unsigned editorials, are usually complete horseshit.


Edit - I generally ignore editorials altogether. Some are better than others. Most are at least honest albeit biased. The Wall Street Journal is extremely biased and extremely dishonest, not a good combination.

While I agree they have a libertarian to right bias, how are they dishonest here? WHAT is it that is wrong with the numbers the editorial pointed out?

Either provide that or stop spouting off as it only makes you look silly to proclaim how dishonest they are without providing any evidence to support it with regards to this article.

 

[cawacko]

While I agree they have a libertarian to right bias, how are they dishonest here? WHAT is it that is wrong with the numbers the editorial pointed out?

Either provide that or stop spouting off as it only makes you look silly to proclaim how dishonest they are without providing any evidence to support it with regards to this article.

The Journal's editorial section is to the right what the NY Times Editorial page is to the left.

 

[Bonestorm]

While I agree they have a libertarian to right bias, how are they dishonest here? WHAT is it that is wrong with the numbers the editorial pointed out?

Either provide that or stop spouting off as it only makes you look silly to proclaim how dishonest they are without providing any evidence to support it with regards to this article.

At the outset, the whole article is a dishonest sham. All ballots cast will be subject to a statewide recount. The results of the audit (which is mandated by state law by the way) are meaningless.

Second, the claim that absentee ballots were in someone's car comes directly from the Coleman campaign. It is an unsourced and unsubstantiated rumor coming from one of the campaigns. It's not worthy of publication anywhere unless it comes with a gigantic fucking qualifier that it is an unsubstantiated rumor coming from the Coleman campaign. That is classic Wall Street Journal Op-Ed page dissembling and dishonesty.

The other "facts" cited can only be found in a column posted on the FOXNews website and written by a hardcore right-winger John Lott. They don't appear anywhere else. Again, classic Wall Street Journal dissembling.

I could go on . .

 

[Bonestorm]

The Journal's editorial section is to the right what the NY Times Editorial page is to the left.

Not even close. Even so, I've never posted an unsigned editorial from the NY Times on nor have I seen anyone else do so.

 

[ib1yysguy]

Why isn't SF complaining about the fact that Ted Stevens was polling 22 points behind before the election, has seven felony convictions, and still managed to get reelected? That doesn't strike him as suspicious?

 

[Socrtease]

The ONLY story I have heard is that one precinct reported 23 votes for Franken and then when they were confronted about the undervote the person there said "Oh I meant 123 votes." Also a person from Minnesota was on the news this morning saying the last time they had a recount they found an additional 4000 votes but it didn't make up the difference.