Here's a short article about a voting machine error which caused a precinct to report 4258 votes for Bush when only 638 votes were cast in all.

I had hoped that it was all over on Wednesday morning.

I saw this on Google news:

Post-Election, Hollywood Seen as Liability to Left

and I felt sure that someone had submitted The Onion to Google's news spools. But it's apparently a real news story. Or perhaps an anti-news story?

Here's a nice article on CBS News' site (of all places) which gives the lie to the "moral values" explanation of the last election -- an explanation which is rapidly moving from conventional wisdom to indisputable fact.

In addition to the issue I raised earlier (that if you combine "Iraq" and "terrorism" then the combined issue -- "security" -- dominates "moral values" 34 to 22), Meyer has a variety of other arguments against the claim that "moral values" voters were particularly important in this election:
- only 22% of voters cited moral values as their greatest concern, up from 17% citing "family values" in 1996.
- what about a voter who votes Kerry because of a strong pro-choice commitment -- isn't that a "moral values" voter?
- what about all the other stark divisions by demographic or issue?

I understand why "Iraq" and "terrorism" are separated in the poll -- because "terrorism" is the name that Bush supporters give to the security issue, and "Iraq" is what Kerry voters call it. When combined, the security voters make up a third of the electorate, and break 60/40 for Bush.