Kerry Routs Redmond


Slate has come out with its quadrennial presidential staff poll, and Kerry just murdalized Bush, 46-4, with one vote apiece going to Greenie David Cobb and the LP's Michael Badnarik. (I counted the votes of non-citzens, too.) This is an even more Democratic result than the 2000 poll, which came out 30-4-3-2 (Gore-Bush-Nader-Browne). Slate staffers also write brief explanations; the most notable tidbit I saw was that the King of Liberal Hawks, Christopher Hitchens, who last week backed Bush, has now come out for Kerry. Editor Jacob Weisberg makes the quadrennial case for journalistic disclosure, remarking: "Repressed politics, like repressed sexuality, tends to find an outlet of one kind or another."

Reason's poll of staff and prominent libertarians is here; my argument for the straight press to disclose is here.

NEXT: Child's Play

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The numbers are even more favorable to Kerry than I expected, but no matter — I appreciate the candor of the staff. As to Hitchens, even last week he seemed to be faltering a bit regarding his support for Bush. Just how he’s come to accept Kerry as a potential wartime President will be interesting to learn more about. He has more faith (?) than I do on that score.

  2. Hitchens remains a British citizen, correct?

  3. I find it hilarious that the guy supporting cobb thought about voting for badnarik but decided against it because to him it looks like he might get a million votes — we should be so lucky…

  4. Regarding Hitchens, he classes his vote for Kerry as an “ironic” one, comparing it to Buchananites endorsing Kerry. It’s pretty clear, if you read his explanation, that he’s attempting to punish Kerry by putting him in the position (as Hitchens sees it) of having to do, Iraq-wise, pretty much everything Bush has pledged to do from this point onward, and generally hoping to force the Democrats to grow up and start acting a little more like Tony Blair.

  5. Figures that the Lithwick dame is a frostback. Slate apparently can’t find a homegrown statist to write about our Constitution, they have to import one.

    I like to think the antitrust persecution of Gates & Co. is karma for his support of the Slaties.


  6. I don’t know, I find Slate at least as important to read as the Christian Science Monitor. Or was it the Watchtower, damn, I forget which one that was.

  7. Also interesting, Mickey Kaus is voting Kerry. He has almost always writes columns favorable to Bush and very anti Kerry. A second intersting point, not only is Microsoft the owner of Slate, but Bill Gates has recently become quite a strong contributor to the Republican party. (, look up Gates, William).

  8. He’s probably a big contributor to republicans because they’re running the show and are the rational target for protection money.

    Hitchens must feel like a world class sucker.

  9. Ryan C, that’s how I read it, too. Hitchens is being Hitchens.

  10. I quit reading and posting on Slate’s Fray because they wouldn’t provide a Badnarik, Nadir or Cobb icon for posters, but they do provide icons for Bush, Kerry, and every one of the failed Democratic candidates.

    So, even now a poster can show their support for Braun, but not for Badnarik or Nadir.

    They have shown themselves to be less than supporters of free speach and political discourse.

  11. Also interesting, Mickey Kaus is voting Kerry. He has almost always writes columns favorable to Bush and very anti Kerry.

    Kaus annonced his support of Kerry quite a while ago. His column is “anti-Kerry” because he doesn’t like Kerry at all; he just thinks he’s a better choice than Bush.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.