We already covered CNN’s fact-mangling in its article on the Maine marriage vote. POLITICO did slightly better today, but still misrepresents the nature of the election and gets some vital Maine political history wrong.
Overall, the piece by POLITICO reporter Alexander Burns is well-written and informative, unlike the CNN article, which was almost entirely useless. Like many in the national media, though, he seems confused about the actual election which is taking place today across our fair state. At the top of the second page he writes:
Supporters of the proposed gay marriage ban remain optimistic that Maine – which has a mixed record on gay-rights referenda – will hand social conservatives at least a narrow victory.
It would certainly be a victory for social conservatives if Mainers voted to “ban” gay marriage today.
It would also be miraculous, since that’s not even an option.
Question One isn’t a ban – as anyone who spends five minutes googling knows. Instead it is a vote on whether to repeal the law enacting same-sex marriage. Even if the law were repealed, it would not prevent the heavily Democratic Legislature from simply passing same-sex marriage again in the 125th Legislature (or even in the Second Session of the 124th).
Aside from their confusion about what we’re actually voting on, the article is interesting. They procured quotes from gubernatorial candidates Peter Mills and Steve Rowe. They manage to correctly identify Rowe as the former AG – but they re-write history by making Mills the 2002 Republican nominee.
We imagine that would surprise a lot of people, like John Baldacci, Peter Cianchette, and Chandler Woodcock.
Oh, and probably Peter Mills, too.
So they manage to rewrite Maine political history and redefine the ballot question all in one article, leading one to wonder whether Mr. Burns studied journalism or creative writing in college.
UPDATE: Politico has corrected the Peter Mills error, but still refers to Question 1 as a “proposed gay marriage ban”
