WSJ gears up to smear NJ election system

I don’t know much about New Jersey’s election system, so I’m not going to stick my neck out defending it. However, I do remember last year when Minnesota’s election officials worked diligently to have a fair, transparent recount — and were smeared all over the pages of the Wall Street Journal editorial pages. The Journal was a major source of disinformation during the Minnesota recount, and they’re gearing up again just in case there’s a recount in New Jersey:

Plenty of reasons exist for suspecting absentee fraud may play a significant role in tomorrow’s Garden State contests. Groups associated with Acorn in neighboring Pennsylvania and New York appear to have moved into the state. An independent candidate for mayor in Camden has already leveled charges that voter fraud is occurring in his city. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party in New Jersey is taking advantage of a new loosely written vote-by-mail law to pressure county clerks not to vigorously use signature checks to evaluate the authenticity of absentee ballots, the only verification procedure allowed. [Wall Street Journal opinion section]

This time, the Journal is prepared. They have a wealth of experience from trashing Minnesota’s election system, and they’re getting out in front just in case they have an opportunity to do it again.

7 Responses to “WSJ gears up to smear NJ election system”


  • Good night for the GOP in Virginia and New Jersey.

    Balance is good.

  • Putting government in the hands of people who as a matter of ideology want the government to fail is not balance, it is stupidity.

  • Why does this question always get posed? I've seen it multiple times.

    Even though it was directed at Kathy, I'll say that this isn't Vegas. I'm not betting for or against Obama. I want our government to succeed. I want them to be efficient, effective, responsible, and reliable. I want them to represent the will of the people, and do it responsibly.

    I want Americans to succeed. If Obama can have a hand in that, great.

  • Actually, a society that can run efficiently with little to no government would likely be considered a success. As would the government designed to provide the best results with the fewest costs in both resources and restrictions on its citizens. A failed government is one where liberty must be sacrificed for safety and the future is continually mortgaged for immediate political advantage. Despite the rhetoric Republicans are not a party of small government, they have continually increased the scope and expense of federal government ever since WW2.

Leave a Reply