# Pat Robertson (again) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 9, 2005, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pat-robertson-again/325417 "2005-10-09T16:47:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2005, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pat-robertson-again/325417/21 "2005-10-11T21:29:38Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Sorry, but there was a lot that is being ignored by that author, and that IMHO is not good. What, exactly, do you consider is “being ignored” by Guillermoprieto in those two articles? Again, are you talking about the articles themselves or just the very brief excerpts from them that I posted? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2005, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pat-robertson-again/325417/22 "2005-10-11T22:18:09Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > What, exactly, do you consider is “being ignored” by Guillermoprieto in those two articles? Again, are you talking about the articles themselves or just the very brief excerpts from them that I posted? Particularly the bit regarding the Súmate: the vote-monitoring organization that got the signatures for the referendum against Chavez, Súmate then monitored the election, they are in trouble because $31,000 were donated to Súmate by the National Endowment for Democracy (the USA). But the report makes it sound that their problems are just because they are in opposition to Chavez. However, I monitored even spanish sources and it came clear that Sumate was not as innocent as pictured here, particularly on the fraudulent way they performed their outside polling: [http://www.truthout.org/docs\_04/082004W.shtml](http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/082004W.shtml) > [@](#): > > U.S. Poll Firm in Hot Water in Venezuela > The Associated Press > > ``` > Thursday 19 August 2004 > > CARACAS, Venezuela Aug. 19, 2004 — A U.S. firm's exit poll that said President Hugo Chavez would lose a recall referendum has landed in the center of a controversy following his resounding victory. > > "Exit Poll Results Show Major Defeat for Chavez," the survey, conducted by Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, asserted even as Sunday's voting was still on. But in fact, the opposite was true Chavez ended up trouncing his enemies and capturing 59 percent of the vote. > > Any casual observer of the 2000 U.S. presidential elections knows exit polls can at times be unreliable. But the poll has become an issue here because the opposition, which mounted the drive to force the leftist leader from office, insists it shows the results from the vote itself were fraudulent. The opposition also claims electronic voting machines were rigged, but has provided no evidence. > > Election officials banned publication or broadcast of any exit polls during the historic vote on whether to oust Chavez, a populist who has sought to help the poor and is reviled by the wealthy, who accuse him of stoking class divisions. > > But results of the Penn, Schoen & Berland survey were sent out by fax and e-mail to media outlets and opposition offices more than four hours before polls closed. It predicted just the opposite of what happened, saying 59 percent had voted in favor of recalling Chavez. > > Cesar Gaviria, secretary general of the Organization of American States who monitored the referendum, said the poll must have had a tremendous impact on Chavez's opponents, who felt they were about to complete their two-year drive to oust him. > > "They were told they had a lead of 20 points and then when the results came, they lost by 20 points," Gaviria said. "It's very difficult to deal with that." > > Both Gaviria and former President Jimmy Carter, another election monitor, endorsed the vote, saying the results coincided with their own independent samplings. > > ``` > > … > > Critics of the exit poll have questioned how it was conducted because officials have said Penn, Schoen & Berland worked with a U.S.-funded Venezuela group that the Chavez government considers hostile. > > ``` > Penn, Schoen & Berland had members of Sumate, a Venezuelan group that helped organize the recall initiative, do the fieldwork for the poll, election observers said. > > ``` > > Roberto Abdul, a Sumate official, acknowledged in a telephone interview that the firm “supervised” an exit poll carried out by Sumate. Abdul added that at least five exit polls were completed for the opposition, with all pointing to a Chavez victory. > > ``` > Abdul said Sumate which has received a $53,400 grant from the National Endowment for Democracy, which in turn receives funds from the U.S. Congress did not use any of those funds to pay for the surveys. > > The issue is potentially explosive because even before the referendum, Chavez himself cited Washington's funding of Sumate as evidence that the Bush administration was financing efforts to oust him an allegation U.S. officials deny. > > ``` Did you notice how the amount of the grant changed in the other serious report? Anyhow, back to what I saw then: the obvious reason for this manipulated exit poll was to get other independent reporters to publish their projections, when the Independent newspaper in England came with the “scoop” (I did a pit thread on that) then it became clear the reason for this: to entice the opposition members to revolt because “there was fraud involved” when the official results of the election were reported, it was a tense time, and I would indeed put Sumate’s feet to the fire for trying to convince the Venezuelan people later that fraud was involved (And many of the Sumate members said so), since a good chuck of the opposition and independents swallowed that, I am not shedding a tear for their current problems. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2005, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pat-robertson-again/325417/23 "2005-10-11T22:48:03Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > However, I monitored even spanish sources and it came clear that Sumate was not as innocent as pictured here Was Guillermoprieto picturing them as “innocent”? From comments like > [@](#): > > And, in any event, [Sumate founder] Plaz explained firmly, and disingenuously, they are not the leaders of a political organization. and > [@](#): > > Last spring, [Sumate co-founder] María Corina Machado was invited to the White House. A photograph appeared in the press of her posing smilingly next to George W. Bush, and caused an uproar in Caracas, not only among chavistas. I got the distinct impression that Sumate was basically a front for anti-Chavez political finaglers with shady political ties to the anti-Chavez US regime, and that most Venezuelans were outraged about it. That didn’t look like “innocent” to me. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2005, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pat-robertson-again/325417/24 "2005-10-11T23:06:58Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Was Guillermoprieto picturing them as “innocent”? From comments like > > and > I got the distinct impression that Sumate was basically a front for anti-Chavez political finaglers with shady political ties to the anti-Chavez US regime, and that most Venezuelans were outraged about it. That didn’t look like “innocent” to me. But the context is this: at the end of the bit on Sumate, the author comments that: > [@](#): > > But it is a safe bet that Chávez would do everything in his power to intimidate and destroy any public figure who came to pose a real threat to his rule Of course, I am concerned that the Asamblea National is under Chavista control, but it was control also gained in elections. The author forgets to mention this bit. This last comment IMO shows that the author does consider sumate a victim. And lets us not forget the information on Sumate that was not reported. ---
**Author:** ![NDP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ndp/32/55_2.png) [@NDP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NDP)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2005, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pat-robertson-again/325417/25 "2005-10-11T23:10:54Z")
Getting back to the OP, I’m almost tempted to dismiss Pat Robertson’s obsessive paranoia about Hugo Chavez since it’s the product of the same mind that wanted to ban Halloween because it was demonic and thought the Smurfs were satanic. (Okay, I’ll admit he may have been on to something with that second one.) However, I then remember he still has a lot of influence on Republican Party policies and that his opinion on Chavez is shared by many people in Congress and in the Bush Administration. Of course, they don’t publicly advocate bumping off Chavez (at least not now) but it’s likely they’ve considered (or even implemented) that or other similar options. As for Chavez himself, I think he’s a populist blowhard who delights in tweaking the nose of Uncle Sam. In terms of his politics and his appeal, he’s like a Venezuelan version of Huey Long and, at his worst, he’s a minor irritant to the U.S. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration (and many of its supporters like Robertson) have such a hatred this guy that they mindlessly keep on antagonizing, poking, and prodding him thereby causing the “minor irritant” to become needlessly inflamed. ---
**Author:** ![thursday\_next](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8797f3/32.png) [@thursday\_next](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thursday_next)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2005, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pat-robertson-again/325417/26 "2005-10-13T07:13:39Z")
[Chavez](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4336660.stm) has recently decided to eject a missionary group (New Tribes Mission). > [@](#): > > Caracas has suggested that American evangelicals are part of a broader conspiracy in Washington to topple a president whose regional influence is growing thanks to massive oil revenues, BBC Americas editor Simon Watts writes. I wonder what Robertson and his ilk will say to that (the expulsion). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pat-robertson-again/325417.md?page=1)