No; where did I say it was all I was doing?
Actually, they go to great lengths to say the exact opposite.
Gadarene said:
Geez, Gad. If you’re going to accuse december of being a racist, go ahead and do it. These snide comments don’t reflect well on you.
Why did CBS News Get it Wrong?
Izzy – thanks for finding all those quotes. Those are the ones I was alluding to last night.
Compare ** Izzy’s** quotes from Allan Lichtman’s statistical analysis to the CBS News report posted by minty green about 8 posts up. What an amazing difference. CBS said:
I don’t know whether Lichtman’s analysis was correct or not. However, I’m struck that the CBS News report missed this key point. Where did they go wrong?
CBS probably relied upon the press release and Executive Summary, rather than read the actual analysis. The Executive Summary totally omitted this point. IMHO the Executive Summary was a partisan statement, designed to produce a certain public impact (and, IMHO it succeeded.) Unfortunately, accuracy and fairness took a back seat to politics.
I also wonder if CBS was afraid that printing such a statement could get them accused of racism. (as happened here. :()
Let me be clear. IMHO the denial of embarrassing facts about particular groups of people disserves everyone, including those groups. Real progress comes from facing reality and dealing with it.
I agree that there is nothing embarrassing to anyone about pointing out that a population group with a disproportionately large number of first-time voters also had a disproportionately large number of spoiled ballots. However, I think the following comment is somewhat too sweeping:
I don’t know whether Lichtman’s analysis was correct or not. However, I’m struck that the CBS News report missed this key point. Where did they go wrong?
Where do you get the idea that they “got it wrong”? They were discussing the fact that the report concluded that many Florida voters, especially blacks, were unfairly denied the right to vote because of various systematic flaws in voting and related procedures. That is not in any way invalidated by pointing out that black voters also disproportionately spoiled ballots.
The report that Izzy linked to explicitly states in its fifth paragraph that “Credible evidence shows many Floridians were denied the right to vote. Analysis of the testimony and evidence gathered by the Commission show that these denials fell most squarely on persons of color.” Those are the chief conclusions of the report, and it was perfectly legitimate for a news story about the report to focus on them. Your complaint that the news story did not also emphasize the fact that there was a correlation between race and ballot spoilage is, IMHO, pretty much beside the point.
december:
Which group of people? First-time voters, or blacks?
If the latter, what embarrassing facts?
(Necros, note how politely I ask.)
Gee, Gadarene, when I saw your name on a new post, I hoped it was an apology. I think you owe me one.
You know very well what “embarassing fact.” The fact that Allan Lichman’s study found that a disproportionate percentage of Black Florida voters spoiled their ballots, and that the percentage cannot be accounted for by voting equipment. Apparently this fact was too embarrassing to be included in the Executive Summary or reported by CBS. I presume your shot at me was a reponse to my allusion to this fact.
The number of Black voters in Florida took an enormous jump in 2000. If Lichtman’s conclusion is correct (which BTW I don’t necessarily concede), the reason could well be the huge number of new voters. However, I won’t hide behind that PC explanation. Plausible as it is, it’s not a part of the study. Lichtman’s study appears to contain useful information. It should be understood and analyzed as a guide to action. We shouldn’t be content to simply find some comfortable explanation.
It behooves people of good will to figure out what the real problems are and deal with them. E.g., if the cause of the problem is new voters, then voter training may be an answer. If the cause is weak inner city public education, then vouchers may be an answer. If the real problem is some sort of racist action by some voting officials, then severe enforcement measures are called for.
I hope this post helps clear up where I’m coming from.
I’m very, very sorry, december. 
Why is that a “PC” explanation?
Your slip is showing. Of the ten Florida counties with the highest percentage of black voters, nine had ballot spoilage rates higher than the statewide average–but five of those nine are rural counties, and three others are in moderate metropolitan areas (Tallahassee, Pensacola, and Jacksonville). Only one, Miami-Dade, is an urban county. What’s more, the one county of the ten in which the spoilage rates were not above average is Leon, which encompasses part of Tallahassee itself. (See Table 1-1 of report for this stuff) So I guess “weak inner-city public education” probably isn’t one of the possibilities.
My understanding of political correcness is that it’s not PC to imply that African-Americans may be at fault. YMMV. An explanation in terms of number of new voters avoids the hint of criticism.
Thanks for digging out the geographic data. It was interesting.
No need to concede anything that is “bloody well obvious”, minty. Only problem is that that which is bloody well obvious is not that which we are discussing.
No one denies that equipment was one of the reasons for the high number of spoiled ballots by minorities. The very quotes that I cited deal with this issue. What we are discussing however, is if this is the explanation for the correlation between race and spoiled ballots. The CRC went to lengths to say that this was only a small part of it. Again:
I assumed that you had meant to say that the reason for Blacks giving a high percentage of spoiled ballots was equipment - maybe you only meant a very small part of the reason, whatever.
(Upon further reflection, it occurs to me that maybe “old and defective equipment” is not the same thing as “technologies that produce the greatest rates of rejected ballots” - it doesn’t seem like that to me, however).
In any event, concede or don’t concede, your choice, as always. 
Any analysis of spoiled ballots vs. race is meaningless if it doesn’t discard (or otherwise account for) Duval County, which had a two page presidential ballot with explict instructions to vote on each page.
As I said in the other thread where this was brought up, I think the whole thing is another example of Lott’s dishonesty with numbers. It’s easy to come up with with huge percentages when dealing with tiny data sets, but it means nothing, all data sets have anomolies within the noise. GIGO
I said I was unwilling to concede the certainty of Lichtman’s conclusion that Black votes were disproportionately spoiled. Tejota’s post helps explain why.
In simple terms, Lichtman’s study observed that districts with higher percentages of Black voters tended to have higher percentages of spoiled votes. The conclusion was that Black votes were more likely to be spoiled. However, individual differences, like the one pointed out by Tejota, render Lichtman’s conclusion less than certain, although it may well be correct.
Minty, as you know, I had contended that the CCR Report was a dishonest representation of Lichtman’s study – a study I considered not totally conclusive. You may well be correct to disagree with me. However, from my POV using the CCR Report as evidence is circular reasoning. I’m questioning the CCR Report. Obviously the CCR Report agrees with itself.
Substitute “John Lott” for “CCR Report” in that last paragraph and you’ve pretty much captured my sentiments too, december.