E-mail: You can read the Citizen Journalist reports here. To write your own report, click here.• November 1, 2004 | 2:36 p.m. ETAn up-to-the-minute round-up of what blogs are buzzing aboutOhio GOTV lines severed? Blogger Dispassionate Liberal followed up on a story that Ohio Get Out The Vote phone lines had been "severed:"

"I put in a call and talked to Bill Takacs, the managing partner [of the office where lines were cut - DJ], who confirmed that the lines were "severed" but have now been repaired. There was no overt evidence of sabotage, however, or who may have been responsible."

Republicans complain about partisan talk-radio: According to an Oct. 29 LA Daily News story, Action filed vs. radio hosts over talk attacks, the National Republican Campaign Committee has filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission, accusing two radio talk show hosts of "criminal behavior" for endorsing Democratic candidate Cynthia Matthews on the air and attacking the Republican candidate, David Dreier .According to the story,

By criticizing Dreier's positions on immigration, promoting a "Fire Dreier" campaign and making on-air appeals for voters to elect Matthews, the NRCC said, the hosts gave Matthews an unlawful corporate, in-kind contribution of more than $25,000.

In an Oct. 30 Washington Times,story, Drier targeted on immigration, John Kobylt who hosts the show with Ken Champiou, says, "We've been doing this for 14 years, and we've never had a reaction like this from a politician," Mr. Kobylt said. "It's really massive hypocrisy. Republicans have gotten a good ride with talk radio; then one show goes after one Republican, and suddenly they want to shut us up? "  —Dave Johnson, Seeing the Forest
Political paparazzi via cell phone: Armed with notepads and camera phones, journalism students are hitting their beats in the run up to Election Day with a single purpose... capturing interesting political news with compelling visual appeal. Cingular Wireless is embarking on an experiment in (mo)blogging with a little help from journalism students at the University of Florida, University of Georgia, University of South Carolina and Washington DC's American University. Hop on over to their site and check things out... who knows, the next time you see a camera flash you may end up on their blog.Do you have digital pictures? E-mail them (with a short write-up) to .—Karl Frisch is a Washington, DC political consultant and regular blogger at www.ChangeForAmerica.com and www.JoeTrippi.com• November 1, 2004 | 1:28 p.m. ETGuest blog from CNBC's Ron Insana: The waiting is the hardest partIt’s down to the wire now and the candidates are pulling out all the stops.One helpful market headline for the Administration is the big $2 drop in crude oil prices today and the nearly $7 a barrel drop in the last week.Now, it’s a bit late in the game to matter, but every little bit helps in a race this tight.Newsweek’s Howard Fineman, speaking on the “Imus in the Morning” program on radio and MSNBC, says that from, not only his gut, but from the mood of members of the two campaigns, he’s beginning to believe that John Kerry may very well pull this out of the fire.If so, some pundits suggest an initial market sell-off and then a rebound.The market is up today based on falling oil prices, so it’s hard to know what Wall Street is discounting vis a vis Washington at this exact moment.Some suggest a Kerry victory means that healthcare stocks will sell off sharply, ancticipating a tougher health care policy from a Kerry Administration.But some smart money managers note that health care has already been beaten down so badly, they find them a bargain … remember … on Wall Street you sell the rumor and buy the news!Presumably we have a little more than a day left to figure this all out… but as Tom Petty once sang, “The Waiting is the Hardest part!”• November 1, 2004 | 1:10 p.m. ETKerry campaign "closing" outreach to voters The Kerry campaign is launching a "closing" Internet-only campaign to voters today.  The effort includes a 2-minute online video, banner ads, blog outreach and a mass e-mailing to their list of supporters. 

From a Kerry/Edwards 2004 campaign press release:

"Taking one last opportunity to remind voters of the clear choice in this election, the Kerry-Edwards campaign today announced the new video "Your Stories," and launched a comprehensive online effort to ensure an unprecedented number of individuals view it in the closing hours of the 2004 campaign. Through Banner Ads, Blogs and the Johnkerry.com email list, the video will be viewed by an estimated over 8 million individuals."

The video is available for viewing online.

A JPEG of the banner ad is available at: http://www.johnkerry.com/images/misc/KE_vote.jpg —Dave Johnson, Seeing the Forest• November 1, 2004 | 11:19 a.m. ETDeclare Yourself (Joe Trippi)If you missed Hardball last night, you missed an incredible moment as Ron Reagan introduced the poets of "Declare Yourself." This really is MUST SEE if you care at all about tomorrow's vote.  I highly recommend watching it by   clicking here— and pass on the URL to a friend— let's see how viral we can make "Declare Yourself"  its pretty amazing -- let me know what you think of it at .• November 1, 2004 | 11:10 a.m. ETSome pre-election blog humor

At Opinions You Should Have, "Poll: Presidential Race Tied At Four Supreme Court Justices Apiece One Justice Undecided":

A recent Gallup/CNN/Newsweek/Time/New York Times/Washington Post/Zogby/Rasmussen Poll of Supreme Court Justices showed that the Presidential race is tied, with 40% of Supreme Court Justices committed to Bush, and 40% for Kerry. 20% of the Court is still undecided. [. . .] Sandra Day O'Connor has said that she has not decided who she will vote for when the Supreme Court decides the election some time after November 2. (Justice Kennedy has also said that he is undecided, but nobody believes him.)

Similarly, at ScrappleFace, "Supreme Court Orders Polling Halt, Names Bush Winner":

The U.S. Supreme Court this morning ordered all pre-election polling halted and declared George W. Bush the favorite to win, if the election were held today. [. . .] The 5-4 court decision was within the margin of error.

And, again at ScrappleFace, a breaking story, "Kerry: GOP Plans to Suppress Lawyer Turnout":

Mr. Kerry said he's heard rumors that Bush-Cheney operatives plan to stage a series of minor automobile accidents in battleground states hoping to draw lawyers away from the polls.

—Dave Johnson, Seeing the ForestBlogospheric roundup

• LA Weekly has pictures of Republicans dressed up as gay activists.
• Digby on why to ignore polls.
• Chris Bowers on the polls.
• Jay Rosen on bloggers and journalism, and the combustible mixture of trends that make this election truly different.

—Matt Stoller, Blogging of the President.  He can be reached at . • November 1, 2004 | 8:32 a.m. ETThe race and THE RACE: New York City. Central Park. Sunday, 9 a.m.Five thousand runners took to the streets for the Poland Spring Marathon Kickoff. I was one of those runners. (My time? Awful, but that's another blog.) Usually, when you're in the start corrals, everyone's talking about the weather, or an upcoming big race. I could hear some people oohing and ahhing over the sunshine and pretty leaves, and others talking about the big race next week (ING New York City Marathon). Some were even talking trash about the World Series. What surprised me was how many people were talking about the race for the White House.I saw Kerry-Edwards t-shirts. Bush-Cheney buttons. Some were handing out "Run Against Bush" stickers, wearing t-shirts that proclaimed they were "running for change." I heard pairs of runners talking politics. One woman was explaining to another about tort reform, medical malpractice, and why it was an election issue. I heard one man heatedly defending his support of President Bush. Two women talked about working the convention. I couldn't keep up with them long enough to hear which one. The political talk was contagious. You could see people picking up the conversations and starting their own. I've been fighting political coverage fatigue for a while now. The battleground states, the polls and the debates all began to run together in the last couple of weeks.But on a beautiful fall day, running five miles through one of America's great green spaces, listening to the animated conversations of some of my fellow runners and looking at their shirts and stickers, I felt that fatigue lift away. This race is still on, and I can't wait to see what happens next.—Nikki Egan, MSNBC ProducerFleshing out the Redskins rule: Red State has mentioned it.  The American Mind has said it.  The left and the right are betting on the Redskins rule.The rule is very simple.  In all the time that the Redskins have existed, if they won their final home game before the Presidential election, the incumbent President won.  In all the time that the Redskins have existed and lost the final home game, the incumbent President lost.Keith Olberman discussed this last night tonight, and has blogged about this.Well, what if we haven't fleshed out the rule?  We have never had an occasion to fully flesh out the rule as we have now.  As Ramesh Ponnuru says what if the rule, placed somewhere in the ether where Santa Claus and black cats walking under ladders exist, is actually that the winner of the popular vote tracks with the Redskins?If that is the case, Kerry will lose on Tuesday and Bush will win. —Erick Erickson, Red State.Org,  ErickErickson.org• October 31, 2004 | 9:13 p.m. ETMight be worth Siouxing overIn South Dakota the race for the United States Senate is too close to call.  A lot of bloggers and political professionals actually think Daschle might be in trouble.  He, as leader of the Democrats in the United States Senate, has failed to clear 50%, which will make it difficult to win.  Daschle is facing Republican John Thune who nearly beat Tim Johnson two years ago.  One of the problems in that race was alleged voter fraud on Indian reservations.

Blogger Mark A. Kilmer reports that "Oglala Sioux tribal Judge Marina Fast Horse signed an order preventing Republicans from observing the voting at the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota."  The United States Attorney says Judge Fast Horse has no authority to issue such an order.  This comes at the same time Republicans are charging that the Democrats are engaged in a vote buying scheme.

More details are available here.—Erick Erickson, Red State.Org,  ErickErickson.org• October 31, 2004 | 4:10 p.m. ETZogby's cell phone poll is favoring Kerry (Joe Trippi)Finally, someone has done a SMS Text Messaging poll of cell phone users between the ages of 18 and 29.  Last night, John Zogby conducted the survey in conjunction with Rock the Vote and the results revealed a 15% lead for John Kerry over George Bush among these voters.  Kerry had 55% with Bush garnering 40% of those surveyed.I’ve been looking at the data from polls in state after state— and there is a common pattern in most of them.  Among voters over the age of thirty, Bush or Kerry (depending on the state) hold a very slim advantage.  Among voters under the age of thirty— and in just about every state— Kerry holds a significant advantage over Bush.   So if this is true, if among those over 30 it’s a dead heat or Bush has a slight advantage, then why with Kerry’s huge advantage among those under 30 just about everywhere, is that advantage not enough to show him in the lead in national and state polls?The reason in my view is that pollsters are using old turn-out models for younger voters, and are failing to see the increased intensity among these voters, and therefore are likely to be surprised on Tuesday night.  It is now becoming increasingly clear to me that if John Kerry wins on Tuesday it will be due to an unprecedented turnout among younger voters.Using Florida as an example:

Zogby statewide has the race 49% Kerry to 47% for Bush.

Among voters 29 years old or younger, it's Kerry 63% and Bush 24%

Among voters over 50 years old its Kerry 44% and Bush 51%

With a statistical dead heat among all voters between 30 and 50 years of age.

If there is a higher than expected turn out of young voters in Florida— John Kerry wins the state, and probably with it the White House.This tends to be true in most of the states that are still up in the air. What this means is that voters between the ages of 18 and 29 are the future, and what they do on Tuesday will decide the nation’s futures for the first time in decades.No wonder John Kerry has suddenly begun to use the Howard Dean “you have the power” refrain in his speeches in these last days of the campaign.Please let me know what you think, and please let me know of any stories, animations, or facts you think need to be reported on between now and the election.   E-mail me right now at Thanks, Joe• October 31, 2004 | 3:50 p.m. ETUp-to-the-minute analysis of what’s happening on the web from the MSNBC Bloggers' Cafe How are states called "red" and "blue"?This most likely certifies my status as a political junkie, but the question I have is not who will win on Tuesday, but what color will the states be.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the map colors used by the media varied with the media outlet.  In 1980, for example, NBC used blue for Ronald Reagan, the challenger.David Brinkley, then at NBC, said Reagan's victory was "beginning to look like a suburban swimming pool."  Time magazine called it "Lake Reagan."

In 1984, the maps varied by network. Some showed Lake Reagan flood the nation, and others showed what could arguably been called (given the outcome) a Reagan slaughter.  The map, for some, was covered in red for Reagan,except Minnesota and the District of Columbia.

By the 1990's the media had fairly standardized the color scheme.  The challenger was always red and the incumbent was always blue.  Notwithstanding that, the National Atlas of the United States, published by the US Geological Survey, maintains that, even in 2000, Bush states were blue and Gore states were red.

The 2000 election might have solidified the red state and blue state distinction.  Republicans and conservatve voters are now commonly referred to as red state voters with Democrats and liberals being referred to as blue state voters.

Being a traditional political junkie, I think it would be great to see Bush states blue and Kerry states red.  One way or another we will find out on Monday night.

For more reading on the subject, with more background, consider this Tom Zeller article from the New York Times. —Erick Erickson, Red State.Org,  ErickErickson.org• October 31, 2004 | 2:00 p.m. ETThe lines in Miami-Dade (David Shuster)I am in downtown Miami today at the Clark Center.  It is the municipal building for Miami-Dade County, the most populous county here the Sunshine State.  The Clark Center is also one of the locations where voters in this county can vote early.  My producer Christina Jamison and I arrived here at 11:30 a.m., 90 minutes before today’s early voting started.  We estimated there were 75 people already waiting in line. At 1 p.m., when the voting began, we estimated the line had grown to 300 people.  As of this note, the line still stretches out the door to the street. Although, it seems to be moving fairly quickly given that there are 57 touch-screen machines here.A team of 25 polling workers and a half-dozen of Goodwill Ambassadors is assisting the voters.  You can’t miss the Goodwill Ambassadors because of their fluorescent orange t-shirts and their bright smiles as they point people in the right direction and answer questions. The energy and enthusiasm here is amazing.  By the way, last night after dinner Christina and I saw Shaquille O’Neal.  Shaq was in a red Ferrari convertible parked in front of our hotel.  Christina didn’t think it was Shaq because he looked so small in his low-to-the-ground sports car.  I was convinced it was him.  When we got into the hotel, the man Shaq had been talking to in the car was holding two gigantic basketball shoes.  I asked the man if those were Shaq’s shoes.  The man said they were!  We learned the man was Shaq’s doctor, in from L.A. and Shaq, among other things, had given him the shoes for a charity event.  As for Shaq’s health, his doctor said, “he is fine.”NBA opponents beware!E-mail David at • October 31, 2004 | 1:45 p.m. ETUp-to-the-minute analysis of what’s happening on the web from the MSNBC Bloggers' Cafe The Right likes Mason-Dixon: Polling on a national level and a state level are two separate animals.  There are, at a state level, different dynamics from a national level poll.  While most state and national polls can pick up similar trends and momentum shifts, getting an accurate response to the "horse race" question in state by state polling varies widely.  Three polls that have been touted to varying degrees on the left and right are Zogby, Mason-Dixon, and Gallup.

In the 1996 Presidential race, pollster John Zogby came exceptionally close to the actually result.  In 2000, the Zogby poll accurately picked up a late breaking surge towards Al Gore, but in both 2000 and 2002 (not to mention 1998, in his New York and Illinois Senate polls), Zogby did not do a good job on the state by state level polls.  o his credit, Zogby did catch shifts in momentum, but was off significantly in a number of races.

One of the best polling companies on a state by state level has been Mason-Dixon.  In 2002, Mason-Dixon accurately chose the winners in 22 out of 23 polls it conducted with a candidate error rate of 1.8%.  Mason-Dixon's 2000, state by state polling was also quite good.  Only Gallup had a lower had a lower candidate error (1.4%).  With that in mind, it is no wonder that Republicans are buzzing about this weekend's Mason-Dixon release of battleground states. MSNBC has the results which are quite favorable to George Bush.  Nonetheless, as a caveat to the poll, Bush is still within the margin of error and has not broken through 50% in several states.  He has managed to get his job approval rating up to or above 50% in the critical states of Ohio and Iowa.  —Erick Erickson, Red State.Org,  ErickErickson.org• October 31, 2004 | 9:13 a.m. ETHello from Miami! (David Shuster)I love this city!  Everything about Miami is inviting... from the people, to the beaches, to the city's latin soul.  Today, however, yours truly arrived for the presidential election.   And once again, the signs are everywhere that Florida could be one of a kind... again.A brief history lesson:.  Four years ago in Florida, George W. Bush received 537 more votes than Al Gore. Since then, 1.4 million MORE voters have registered. The GOP added 462,000... The Democrats added 458,000.  Another 500,000 registered without stating a party preference.  There have been some other changes here in the sunshine state.  The "punch card" ballots are gone... replaced by touch screen systems.  It means that "under votes" will prompt computer questions asking voters if  they really intend to do that.  (Undervotes are allowed.)   "Over votes" will not be allowed and are not possible on the touch screen systems.  So, here in Miami-Dade where tens of thousands of ballots were "spoiled" four years ago by over/under problems, voters have something of a safety net that they did not have in 2000.   Furthermore, the infamous "butterfly ballot" that caused so much confusion in Palm Beach County is gone.  (That's the county where elderly voters seemed "confused" by the ballot...  Pat expected 500 votes and instead received 3,411.) As both presidential campaigns try to figure out where their "numbers" are going to come from on election day here in Florida, I've heard more than a few strategists talk about an election night  "boomerang" in the Kerry/Bush popular vote count.  Everybody expects the state's more rural (and GOP leaning) counties to report their results first... and the largest counties (Miami-Dade and Broward) to report their election results last... perhaps several hours after the rest of the state.   Between these two counties four years ago, Al Gore received 250,000 more votes than George W. Bush.  This year, if the state is close again, George W. Bush will likely have a raw vote lead over John Kerry for several hours after the polls close.   Both parties expect that.  (In the 19 panhandle states 4 years ago, Bush received 100,000 more votes than Gore.)  The question is, how big will that lead be... and will it be large enough to hold off Kerry's gain in south Florida when those precincts start pouring in around midnight.  Both campaigns have been looking at the numbers, precinct by precint... and so have broadcast journalists who got burned by not understanding the "boomerang" four years ago.questions, comments, Florida "advice?"  • October 30, 2004 | 9:35 p.m. ETIraq War vs. Culture War (Terry Jeffrey, Editor of Human Events) It’s not the economy, stupid.The Commerce Department announced Friday that the Gross Domestic Product grew at an annualized rate of 3.7% in the third quarter, up from 3.3% in the second quarter.  nemployment is at a relatively low 5.4%.  In 1996, when Bill Clinton ran for reelection—with Democrats touting the economy—growth was only 2.2% in the third quarter and unemployment, at 5.2%, stood pretty much where it does today.Last Thursday night, I saw Teamsters President James Hoffa talking to Chris Matthews on Hardball from a warehouse in Minneapolis.  He said the election is about three issues: “jobs, jobs, jobs.” But if Hoffa had checked the jobs figures for Minnesota he would have found that unemployment there is only 4.6%.If people vote on the economy in Minnesota, President Bush wins the state.  The same goes for the nearby swing states of Wisconsin and Iowa, where unemployment is at 4.7% and 5.0%, respectively.But, on the margin, the economy will not be the determining issue in this election.  The determining issues will be the Iraq War, the Terror War and the Cultural War.At a time when the U.S. economy is doing relatively well, public dissatisfaction with the war in Iraq is the only reason John Kerry has any chance of winning Tuesday.  But greater public confidence in President Bush’s ability to keep the American homeland safe from terrorists and deep disagreement with Kerry’s Massachusetts-liberal views on social issues in the South and in much of the Midwest may give Bush the edge he needs to hold the White House.
The most important swing voters in this election are culturally conservative Democrats. And they may have their greatest impact in the three contiguous Midwest states mentioned above: Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin.Gore won each of these narrowly in 2000.  If Bush were to win two out of three this year, he could actually lose Ohio plus every state along the Eastern seaboard from Maryland north to the Canadian border (including New Hampshire, where he beat Gore in 2000) and still win the election.As much as the Northeastern liberal media elite may believe—and try to make the rest of Americans believe—that conservative views on issues such as abortion and marriage narrow the base of the Republican Party and are outside the mainstream, it is these very issues that may broaden Bush’s base enough to boost him to reelection in one of the tightest races in our history.  They have buoyed him in many blues states, putting him within striking distance even in Michigan and Pennsylvania—which Kerry can in no way afford to lose.  Come Tuesday night, it just might be Democrats in Dubuque and Milwaukee—who don’t want a Massachusetts liberal to appoint the next Chief Justice—who re-elect a Republican President.On Wisconsin!  What do you think? email
• October 30, 2004 | 8:23 p.m. ETWatch Wisconsin (Joe Trippi)Just a few minutes ago I was sitting with Dee Dee Myers and Pat Buchanan and it turns out that there is something all three of us can agree on— Wisconsin  is the state to watch if George Bush carries Florida on Tuesday.If Bush loses Florida, it's hard to see any plausible scenario in which he wins the presidency— but as things stand today if Bush wins Florida he can still lose Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan and still be in the hunt for the 270 electoral votes to win the presidency.If Florida goes to Bush— the race is likely to come down to 3 midwestern states:  Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin.  Even with Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan, Kerry must win  Minnesota and Wisconsin to avoid giving Bush the electoral vote daylight he needs to win it all.If Kerry wins only Iowa and Minnesota and Wisconsin goes to Bush— we are likely to see a 269 to 269 electoral college tie— that will be decided by the House of Representatives.  Bush wins that vote.Certainly there can be a surprise victory for Kerry in another state— and certainly the Bush team can hope to win outright by taking an unexpected state like Hawaii.   But the state that may well decide it all could well be Wisconsin.   That’s the state I’ll be watching on Tuesday.What’s your electoral strategy?  What state/s will you be looking for to tip the scale of victory in the direction of your candidate?Let me know at • October 30, 2004 | 7:09 p.m. ETThe buzz from Bloggers'  CafeUp-to-the-minute analysis of what’s happening on the web from the MSNBC Bloggers' Cafe Clear Channel:  The New Sinclair? Apparently, Stolen Honor, the documentary slamming John Kerry's war record in Vietnam, is being broadcast on some Clear Channel stations.  WJBO in Baton Rouge, for one.  Any of you out there, where else are you hearing on the radio announcements that Stolen Honor will be broadcast prior to the election? Let me know at and put in the subject line of your email STOLEN HONOR.  —Matt Stoller, who writes for the Blogging of the President

What Cronkite said: The right side of the internet tends to think Osama raising his head after so long is helpful to Bush.  While some on the left disagree, many on both sides are focusing on Walter Cronkite's statement last night on Larry King. According to Ann Althouse, blogging at Instapundit, Cronkite said, "In fact, I'm a little inclined to think that Karl Rove, the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, he probably set up bin Laden to this thing." —Erick Erickson, Red State.Org, ErickErickson.orgThe Little Gift: On Atrios ("What Republicans think of the guy responsible for thousands killed"), Kos ("I'm not sure why Republicans think the American voters will reward incompetence"), Oliver Willis, ("The spectre of terrorism is seen as a boost for them"), Josh Marshall, ("Does the president really see bin Laden's message as a "gift"?), and others, bloggers are writing about a NY Daily News story that the Republicans see bin Laden as "a little gift."

"We want people to think 'terrorism' for the last four days," said a Bush-Cheney campaign official. "And anything that raises the issue in people's minds is good for us." 

A senior GOP strategist added, "anything that makes people nervous about their personal safety helps Bush."  He called it "a little gift," saying it helps the President but doesn't guarantee his re-election.

Brad DeLong is reminded of a passage from Orwell's 1984,

[S]o long as they remain in conflict they prop one another up, like... sheaves of corn.... [I]t is necessary that the war should continue everlastingly and without victory.... In past ages, a war, almost by definition, was something that sooner or later came to an end, usually in unmistakable victory or defeat.... But when war becomes literally continuous.... The war, therefore, if we judge it by the standards of previous wars, is merely an imposture.... But though it is unreal it is not meaningless...

—Dave Johnson, Seeing the Forest.Comments for our Bloggers' Cafe?  Email • October 30, 2004 |  7:09 p.m. ETA lot of you are disagreeing with Chris' opinion that the bin Laden tape helps Pres. Bush. Here are a few Hardblogger e-mails:This tape is another painful reminder that the man responsible for the horror of 9/11 is still alive and well. If anyone would have suggested, shortly after 9/11 occured, that Bin Laden would escape justice and remain alive at the end of 2004, I would have scoffed at the thought. At that time I fervently believed America possessed the military capabilty and the strong leadership required to fight the new war against terrorism. This tape proves that supposition woefully wrong, and is a slap in the face of every American who has suffered and lived in fear since that fateful day in 2001. This Tuesday I plan to go to the polls and slap the face of than man who has allowed our most nefarious enemy to continue to taunt, threaten, and possible harm us in the future.     —Wesley Kendall, JD I'm really, really, sick of you talking about Bush's "heroics" after 9/11. Standing on a pile of rubble and shouting through a megaphone is heroic? I didn't think so then and I don't think so now. The only person in the Bush administration who was heroic was Richard Clarke. I lost friends at the trade center that day, and I'll go to my grave believing that the Bush administration's incompetence caused their deaths. All Bin Ladin's new video does is remind people that he's at large because Bush let him get away at Tora Bora. So not a help for Bush at all.  —Lisa Crider, Austin, TX Click here to read more.• October 29, 2004 |  11:58 p.m. ETWho do you believe? (David Shuster)The appearance of Osama Bin Laden reminds me of something I wrote in a previous blog.  Hundreds of  you sent me some incredibly "colorful" e-mails as you took issue with my use of the word "misleading" as I described the President's campaign comments about the hunt for Osama Bin Laden.On Senator Kerry's criticisms about Bin Laden escaping from Tora Bora in December 2001, President Bush has said repeatedly, "Our intelligence reports placed Bin Laden in any of several different countries at the time."To those of you who think this is not misleading, read on...

U.S. Concludes Bin Laden Escaped at Tora Bora Fight
Failure to Send Troops in Pursuit Termed Major Error

By Barton Gellman and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, April 17, 2002; Page A01

The Bush administration has concluded that Osama Bin Laden was present during the battle for Tora Bora late last year and that failure to commit U.S. ground troops to hunt him was its gravest error in the war against al Qaeda, according to civilian and military officials with first-hand knowledge.

Intelligence officials have assembled what they believe to be decisive evidence, from contemporary and subsequent interrogations and intercepted communications, that Bin Laden began the battle of Tora Bora inside the cave complex along Afghanistan's mountainous eastern border. Though there remains a remote chance that he died there, the intelligence community is persuaded that Bin Laden slipped away in the first 10 days of December.

After-action reviews, conducted privately inside and outside the military chain of command, describe the episode as a significant defeat for the United States. A common view among those interviewed outside the U.S. Central Command is that Army Gen. Tommy R. Franks, the war's operational commander, misjudged the interests of putative Afghan allies and let pass the best chance to capture or kill al Qaeda's leader. Without professing second thoughts about Tora Bora, Franks has changed his approach fundamentally in subsequent battles, using Americans on the ground as first-line combat units.

In the fight for Tora Bora, corrupt local militias did not live up to promises to seal off the mountain redoubt, and some colluded in the escape of fleeing al Qaeda fighters. Franks did not perceive the setbacks soon enough, some officials said, because he ran the war from Tampa with no commander on the scene above the rank of lieutenant colonel. The first Americans did not arrive until three days into the fighting. "No one had the big picture," one defense official said.

Comments, questions, "colorful" responses... • October 29, 2004 |  8:02 p.m. ETBelow are Chris' thoughts on how the new bin Laden tape can turn the Nov. 2 elections, as aired on MSNBC this afternoon:The bin Laden tape helps President Bush (Chris Matthews)A lot of people thought bin Laden was dead. He’s alive now, and we know it for sure. The tape shows us that Bin Laden's well enough to do this tape. Some people may find problems with his left arm, but he’s alive and we have not caught him. He escaped at Tora Bora, and he’s still a free man.His tape raises the issue of 9/11 again in very vivid terms. He’s talking about Manhattan, about the people killed, about that terrible day for Americans. This turn of events is a plus for the president because it raises Bush’s concern, one he’s raised throughout the campaign—which is terrorism, and how we fight it.  It shifts attention away dramatically from the war in Iraq (which hurts the president, based upon all the assessments so far).Bush’s handling of 9/11 was universally applauded. He's not as successful with the waging and justifying of the war in Iraq.It’s a dumb show in a sense: If you read it literally, he’s calling for the defeat of President Bush, but he's not doing John Kerry a favor. Anyone with a brain in this planet knows that’s a way for President Bush to get support in this country. It’s impossible for us to know if he’s being ironic, clever, shrewd or stupid. In the cold war, Khrushchev very much liked John  F. Kennedy. He said to Kennedy, “I was rooting for you in the campaign against Nixon, but I did you a favor of never saying so.” The tape also makes fun of the president for being an "inherited monarch." He’s saying the Middle East is run by sons of kings, and by generals and their sons. He says it’s easy for him to deal with Bush because he’s dealt with those monarchs.It’s a trashing of a president. He's treating Bush as one of the “idiot sons of a monarchy” who got their job because of heredity. The tape is also an appeal to the Arab community in the world, using our pro-Israeli alliance and using our support for at-times corrupt dictatorships in the world. We’re talking about a shrewd politician, he knows the sensitive points in the history of the Arab-America relationship and he’s playing on Arab sensitivities very brilliantly. But remember, bin Laden tried to kill 50,000 people on 9/11. He killed only about a tenth that number—thanks to the bravery of our men and women, our firefighters.  He’s playing some sick game with the American people. That won’t work with the American people, not any of this will.  Click here to watch video of Chris' analysis.E-mail your thoughts to • October 29, 2004 |  8:00 p.m. ETClick here to read the first Citizen Journalist reports that have trickled in. Check back on 'Hardblogger' and the rest of the MSNBC blogs, as we'll be posting more!

More blogging Keith Olbermann's 'Bloggermann'

Hardblogger archive Previous posts: Oct. 18-Oct. 29 Previous posts: Oct. 7-Oct.17 Previous posts: Sept. 29-Oct. 6 Previous posts: Sept. 13-28 Previous posts: Sept. 3-12 Previous posts: Sept. 1-2