Hitchens says: quite a few. Worth checking out.
Gary Farber makes two good points.
1. Christopher Hitchens offers a reasonable prima facie case that there was large-scale dirty work in the Ohio vote count: unaccountable patterns of undervotes and votes counted for fringe candidates, on top of the ordinary business of making sure that places where Democrats vote didn’t have enough machines.
2. The fact that Hitchens supported Bush creates a presumption that he isn’t just making it up.
Hitchens doesn’t strike me as an especially reliable reporter, so I wouldn’t just take his word for it. But he’s no fool, and the story he tells seems convincing. So I’m inclined to take it seriously unless and until someone shows that it isn’t right.
Author: Mark Kleiman
Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out.
Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken)
When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist
Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993)
Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989)
View all posts by Mark Kleiman