The fact that you’re willing to accept your wife’s infidelity for some greater political good is beyond honorable. In fact, it’s so over-the-top honorable that I’m not sure I believe your motives are real. Part of me wonders why you’re even posing this question, particularly in a column that is printed in The New York Times.

Your dilemma is intriguing, but I don’t see how it’s ambiguous. Your wife is having an affair with a person you happen to respect. Why would that last detail change the way you respond to her cheating? Do you admire this man so much that you haven’t asked your wife why she keeps having sex with him? I halfway suspect you’re writing this letter because you want specific people to read this column and deduce who is involved and what’s really going on behind closed doors (without actually addressing the conflict in person). That’s not ethical, either.

It seems to me Klosterman hit the nail on the head.

How did I do?

With Florida now in Obama’s column, he won with 332-206. So, I hit the electoral result exactly right.

Though some votes are still being counted, the popular vote tally right now is 61,122,638 for Obama and 58,130,991 for Romney.

That is a margin of 51.3% to 48.7%. So I was off by 0.2% nationally. Not bad I think.

As for the battleground states, my head-to-head predictions for the margins and actual results (as they stand now) are as follows:

So, I nailed the margins in 2 states: Florida and Nevada. I missed 3 states by a hair: Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania. I missed the margins in 6 states by large margins of 2% to 4%. So, not bad on the battleground state margins but not great either.

From the moment Mitt Romney stepped off stage Tuesday night, having just delivered a brief concession speech he wrote only that evening, the massive infrastructure surrounding his campaign quickly began to disassemble itself.

Aides taking cabs home late that night got rude awakenings when they found the credit cards linked to the campaign no longer worked.

“Fiscally conservative,” sighed one aide the next day.

Sigh, indeed.

7:02pm: Virginia too close to call. Not surprising.

7:10pm: Exit polls: Democrats outpacing Republicans and independents in Virginia.

7:10pm: Romney is toast if Virginia goes blue

7:30pm: Polls close in the big enchilada, Ohio. Too close to call. Again, not surprising at poll closing.

7:38pm: FYI. Usually rural counties come in first in Virginia. So far, thats the case. The numbers will change dramatically as Northern Virginia and the bigger counties come in.

7:48pm: Exit polls: Democrats outpacing Republicans and independents in Ohio.

7:56pm: Virginia suspends counting votes since there are still people in voting lines. They don’t want to unduly influence the vote.

8pm: Pennsylvania just closed. Obama has lead but too early to call. Florida too close to call with 41% vote in with Obama leading.

8:06pm Cuyahoga County results right now has Obama at 70%. He needs this too stay that way.

8:32pm: NBC calls it for Chris Murphy in the Connecticut senate race.

9pm: Michigan called for Obama.

9pm: New Mexico called for Obama.

9:06pm: Florida not looking good for Romney. 74% vote in but Obama leading with Miami-Dade only reporting 15%.

9:11pm: NBC calls it for Elizabeth Warren. This is a big one.

9:12pm: Indications are this won’t be a good night for Romney. We’ll see as the votes fill out on Ohio, Florida and Virginia. Also, watch North Carolina - closer than expected.

9:15pm: Pennsylvania called for Obama. So much for the Romney Pennsylvania gambit.

9:29pm: Wisconsin called for Obama. Another Romney fantasy meets reality.

9:36pm: The Nets won’t say it,  but it is near mathematically impossible for Romney to now win.

9:44pm: Joe Donnelly projected winner in Indiana senate. This is a big win for sanity, women’s rights and, frankly, humanity.

9:50pm: Obama wins New Hampshire. The door has closed for Romney.

10:10pm: Claire McCaskill wins in Missouri. Big win against another nutjob.

10:20pm: About Virginia: The big Northern Virginia counties have not come in yet. Those will all go Obama. The rural counties have come in predictably for Romney. The margin will close and Obama should overtake when Fairfax County comes in.

10:42pm: Ok, Fairfax is starting to come in. 63% in and Romney now only leads by 16,000. I think Virginia must now be said to be going to Obama. I’ll wait for the Nets to call it.

10:44: NBC News call Minnesota for Obama. Another nail in the coffin for Romney.

10:56pm: NBC News calls it for Tim Kaine in Virginia. Yay! No macacca this year

11:00pm: This one is for my brother. California - shockingly! - goes for Obama

11:03pm: Denver Post just called Colorado for Obama. Waiting on the Nets to call it. Fox News must be freaking out now.

11:05pm: Romney wins North Carolina narrowly.

11:10pm: Iowa called for Obama. I want to see Karl Rove’s face. Switching to Fox

11:14pm: Ohio has been called for Obama. Fox News studio is all depressed

11:16pm: Barack Obama has been re-elected as the President of the United States.

11:32pm: Obama now leads in Virginia thanks to Fairfax County with 91% reporting.

12:02am: Virginia called for Barack Obama!

12:06am: Nevada called for Barack Obama!

12:10am: NBC News finally calls Colorado.

12:10am: My mistake on Virginia. Thought it was called by the Nets. Not yet. Should be shortly.

12:26am: Obama now leading by 51,000 votes in Virginia with Democratic counties remaining. NYT has called it but not the Nets yet. They will wait for all the votes to come in.

12:37am: Tammy Duckworth won and beat deadbeat tea party dude Joe Walsh.

12:39am: Virginia now called for Barack Obama by the AP and CBS News.

12:42am: Karl Rove is having a meltdown on live TV on Fox News.

12:42am: Romney has still not conceded. This is getting sad.

12:51am: Romney to concede shortly.

12:51am: Waiting on Florida to make it 332-206! Come on Florida!

12:55am: Tammy Baldwin wins senate seat from Wisconsin.

1:04am: Mitt Romney concedes in a gracious speech - a graciousness that was lacking from him during the campaign.

1:17am: Its pretty clear that Florida will go to Obama giving him a 332-206 electoral victory. I’ll wait for the Nets to call it before I gloat about my prediction

2:00am: That was a powerful speech from the President.

2:20am: Now, unleash the Biden!

2:27am: NBC News finally joins every other Net and calls Virginia for Obama.

2:43am: Alan West defeated in Florida. Great news for sanity and civility.

This is what I wrote four years ago when John McCain made a similar late play for Pennsylvania (much of the poll analysis in that post remains true this time around):

So, stop the nail biting.

As to why McCain decided to go after Pennsylvania, what choice did he have? He is trailing badly in the Southwest and is likely losing Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico. He cannot win without carrying Pennsylvania, while holding Ohio, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Missouri and Indiana (not to mention North Dakota, Montana, Georgia and Arizona). A look at the electoral map makes clear that he had no choice but to go after Pennsylvania. McCain’s Pennsylvania gambit is a sign of weakness, not strength.

Now, you can make the argument that the polls are inaccurate. Perhaps. But, the polls are the best evidence we have right now of the state of the race. I am more comfortable judging the race based on the polls than on some nebulous “gut feeling”. I refuse to go into a fetal position because of a “gut feeling” or because of McCain campaign spin. And you shouldn’t either.

This is no time to become complacent, but it is also not a time to succumb to fear on the cusp of success. Until the polls close next Tuesday, leave the worry aside, work hard to get the vote out and make sure you vote.

Romney is in Pennsylvania because he is in trouble in Ohio, just like McCain was in 2008. Like McCain, Romney has barely broken 45% in the poll composites. Like McCain, Romney’s Pennsylvania gambit is a sign of weakness, not strength. You can’t win Pennsylvania if you can’t poll much higher than 45%, period.

So, go vote tomorrow and re-elect the President. All indications are that Pennsylvanians should keep Pennsylvania blue once again.

President Obama with Bill Clinton and Tim Kaine at Bristow, VA yesterday

It has been a long long time since I’ve written a blog post. However, it’s time to make election predictions. So here goes mine.

I predict that this Tuesday President Barack Obama will be re-elected for a second term. I predict a national popular vote margin of 51.5% to 48.5% for Barack Obama. I predict an electoral college win of 332 to 206 for Barack Obama.

Here are my state-by-state battleground predictions (excluding third party candidates):

Obama will win Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, Ohio, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. Romney will win North Carolina.

Colorado: Obama 51%, Romney 49%

Florida: Obama 50.5%, Romney 49.5%

Iowa: Obama 52%, Romney 48%

Nevada: Obama 53%, Romney 47%

Ohio: Obama 51.5%, Romney 48.5%

Michigan: Obama 53%, Romney 47%

New Hampshire: Obama 51%, Romney 49%

North Carolina: Romney 50.5%, Obama 49.5%

Pennsylvania: Obama 53%, Romney 47%

Virginia: Obama 51.7%, Romney 48.3%

Wisconsin: Obama 51.5%, Romney 48.5%

So, why will Obama win and Romney lose? I think the American people seldom, if ever, elect a candidate if that candidate’s campaign is essentially a bet against America. Romney’s bet was that the American economy would tank - he bet wrong. We are left now with a flailing Romney campaign that looks at positive jobs numbers and tries to spin them as something bad for America. I think the collective wisdom of the electorate can see that for what it is: a bet against America. That bet translates into a failed campaign for the presidency.

President Obama is pulling America out of an economic mess left him by the previous administration. The steady turn from losing 800,000 jobs a month when he took office to gaining over 170,000 a month as of this month is positive for America. Denying that reality was never a winning strategy for Romney. I think Tuesday will bear that out in an Obama win.

Now all that remains is for the American people to vote and make history once again. So, go vote.

9:00:48 PM: Obama gettting ready to thread the needle on Afghan policy.

9:01:19 PM: Any Afghan policy that ignores the Pak military’s incubation of Islamists is destined for failure.

9:02:25 PM: Obama takes the stage at West Point. Here we go…

9:03:37 PM: Obama: “We did not ask for this fight.”

9:04:43 PM: Obama: “Al Qaeda…distorted and destroyed Islam…one of the world’s great religions.”

9:05:20 PM: Obama: Congressional approval to act against Al Qaeda is still in force today.

9:06:08 PM: Obama: We attacked Afghanistan after Taliban refused to hand over Osama bin Laden.

9:06:59 PM: Obama: Iraq war pulled resources away from Afghanistan. We are now bringing Iraq war to a close.

9:07:44 PM: Obama building rationale - legal and otherwise - for escalating in Afghanistan.

9:08:18 PM: Obama: “Taliban maintains ‘common cause’ with Al Qaeda”

9:08:57 PM: Big mistake to conflate Taliban with Al Qaeda. That’s a recipe for a quagmire in Afghanistan.

9:10:19 PM: Obama makes weak argument for the current Afghan government. He says election marred by fraud but government is legitimate. WEAK.

9:11:13 PM: Obama: owe troops “a mission that is clearly defined”. Easier said than done.

9:12:24 PM: No serious person would fault Obama for taking his time making his decision. No need for him to defend deliberation time here. Ignore Cheney

9:14:03 PM: Is Obama LBJ or FDR? Still up in the air.

9:15:20 PM: Obama: “I am convinced our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan.” The most important line of the speech so far - crucial point.

9:16:49 PM: When Obama says “it is from here new attacks are being plotted”, he is referring to Afghanistan AND Pakistan. Nicely done.

9:17:49 PM: Obama: recently extremists were sent here from the “border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan” to commit new acts of terror.

9:18:44 PM: Obama speaking of “partners” in the region. He means Karzai and the Pak military. Both bad bets.

9:19:39 PM: Obama: goal is to “disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan”. Good goal, but perhaps, bad plan.

9:20:55 PM: Hmm: Obama says “to meet that goal, we will pursue the following objectives WITHIN Afghanistan”. What happened to Pakistan?

9:22:17 PM: Obama’s plan: 30,000 troops to Afghanistan to roll back Taliban and prop up Karzai. Doomed to failure.

9:23:57 PM: Flashback to Soviet withdrawal: Afghan prime minister and defence minister shell each other over skies in Kabul. I see a repeat whn US out.

9:24:52 PM: Hard to get support from Afghan people with food while there are boots on the ground killing civilians - however inadvertantly.

9:26:06 PM: The “cancer” in Pakistan is not limited to the “border regions”. Once again, American misdiagnosis of Pakistan. Same old, same old.

9:27:07 PM: Obama needs to study up on Pakistani military doctrine. Study 1971 and use of Islamist paramilitaries by Pak army. That has not changed.

9:28:05 PM: Obama says “there are a range of concerns” about Obama’s plan.

9:28:44 PM: Obama says Afghanistan is not Vietnam. He is right, but Afghanistan IS Afghanistan - and there lies the rub.

9:29:49 PM: Obama does not want to “muddle through” with current troop levels. Again, he is right. But, that again is not, and never has been, an option

9:30:36 PM: Obama rejects open-ended commitment. That is of course a good thing. But this is also why occupations are doomed in Afghanistan.

9:32:59 PM: The speech is winding down. It has been an extremely disappointing speech. In a sense, Obama punted. Disappointing.

9:35:03 PM: This is Obama trying to dig himself out of the mess GWB left him. It is not a long term strategy for South and Central Asia. Opp missed.

9:38:56 PM: Obama’s plan in a nutshell: prop up Karzai + prop up Pak army + insert 30,000 US troops = success. Plan ignores history and reality.

9:40:02 PM: Obama’s plan ignores root causes of instability in that region. Fails to excise al Qaeda from Afghanistan and stem unchecked Islamism in Pak

9:45:41 PM: Success vs al Qaeda required separating them from Taliban and creating rift between al Qaeda and their Afghan hosts. This plan does reverse.

9:51:07 PM: Closing thought on the Obama speech: The speech demonstrates a lack of vision. Clearly a product of decision by committee.

Final vote tally is 220-215 as the House passes HR 3962. Well done.

On Sunday, Bangladeshi police descended upon Drik Gallery in Dhaka to prevent the launch of a photo exhibition on Tibet. BDNews24 reports:

Dhaka, Nov 1 (bdnews24.com)—Police prevented Drik Gallery in Dhanmondi from launching an exhibition, titled ‘Into Exile: Tibet 1949 – 2009′, on Sunday.

The exhibition was organised by ‘Students for a Free Tibet’, and includes some very rare photos of the Dalai Lama’s journey into exile.

An hour before the launch, scheduled for 5pm, police shut the gates preventing public from entering the gallery, said Drik authorities.

Drik managing director Shahidul Alam said Bangladesh Police Special Branch spoke with him and asked him to stop the exhibition citing a “government order”.

Alam said, although the police officers could not produce any document of the order, they threatened to shut down the show by force if the organisers did not do so willingly.

According to DrikNEWS, representatives from the Chinese Embassy requested the the weeklong photography exhibition be cancelled.

Drik authorities said they came under pressure for last two days to close down the exhibition.

Alam told bdnews24.com, “The day before yesterday (Friday), two officers from the Chinese Embassy came and asked us to cancel the exhibition.”

“After that I also received a series of phone calls from the ministry of cultural affairs and from a number of MPs.”

“On Saturday, officers from the Special Branch of police came and exerted pressure to stop the exhibition according to a ‘government order’. I wanted a written copy of the government order but they refused to show me.”

The chief guest, who was to inaugurate the exhibition, was the chairman of Transparency International, Dr. Muzaffar Ahmed. I wonder if the government sees the irony in its police action.

This is the sad reality of Bangladesh. A country that has been ostensibly independent since 1971 uses its shock troops in the service of powerful foreign governments. The Bangladesh government has embarrassingly surrendered its sovereignty in order to appease its Chinese masters. Yet all of this is perfectly in line with the Bangladesh Constitution. Article 39 of the Bangladesh Constitution has a curious stipulation. Even though the Constitution guarantees freedom of thought and conscience, it is not so generous when it comes to freedom of speech, expression and press. Article 39 in it entirety states:

Freedom of thought and conscience, and of speech.

(1) Freedom or thought and conscience is guaranteed. Freedom of thought and conscience, and of speech.
(2) Subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interests of the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence- the right of every citizen of freedom of speech and expression; and freedom of the press, are guaranteed.  [Emphasis added by me]

So, according to the Bangladesh Constitution, a citizen can think whatever he or she wants, but he or she dare not say it, or express it, or publish it if it goes against the interests of “friendly relations with foreign states”. Bangladeshi citizens sadly are at the mercy of powerful states like China when it comes to exercising what they believe are rights they earned in 1971 at the cost of 3 million lives.

So, I feel bad for Drik and Bangladeshis who thought they could learn something about Tibet through the medium of art. But, sadly, they are working under an illusion of freedom. My friend and prominent Bangladeshi blogger Shada Kalo has written a post chastising the Bangladesh government for failing to “protect and follow the constitution of Bangladesh” in preventing the exhibition, but Shada Kalo has also been duped by this illusion. The government is sadly not in unconstitutional territory.

The illusion is the false promise of freedom in Bangladesh’s Constitution. It is incumbent on Bangladeshi citizens to demand this travesty be corrected. If not, it will not only be photo exhibitions that suffer.

[Click image to see all photos from the conference]

Last Sunday I attended a conference on the Bangladeshi Genocide. It was organized by the Human Rights Institute and the Bangladesh Genocide Study Group at Kean University. This was the second such conference at Kean. The first one, which I also attended, was held in December 2007.

The conference consisted of multiple panel discussions as well as the presentation of a documentary on the 1971 genocide. The focus was on eyewitness accounts, documentation and memorialization of the Genocide, and the upcoming Genocide trials in Bangladesh.

Mofidul Hoque of the Bangladesh Liberation War Museum - a privately funded effort in Bangladesh - kicked off the discussion in the morning with a presentation of the efforts of the Museum to preserve the history of the War and Genocide. He was followed by a speech from the Ambassador of Bangladesh to the United States, Akramul Qader. The Ambassador outlined the Bangladesh government’s plan to begin genocide trials to bring to justice those who have enjoyed impunity for their actions for nearly 4 decades. Following the Ambassador, a number of eyewitnesses to the genocide of 1971 presented testimony of their experiences.

After a lunch break, the discussion moved to a number of expert panels on the genocide. Notable amongst these were a panel discussion on atrocities committed during the Genocide and the expert panel on prosecutable crimes during the Genocide. The panel on atrocities - with Dr. ABM Nasir of North Carolina Central University, Dr. Shelley Feldman of Cornell University and, via phone, Dr. Adam Jones of Gendercide Watch - brought into focus the dearth of source material on the Genocide available in the English language. This lack of material available in English has seriously hindered scholarly study of the 1971 Genocide.

The panel on prosecutable crimes consisted of experts on international law and war crimes. Dr. Keith Nunes, Coordinator of the Holocaust & Genocide Studies program at Kean, moderated the discussion involving Dr. David Matas, Senior Counsel of B’nai Brith of Canada and a member of Canadian delegations to conferences on the International Criminal Court and the Holocaust, Dr. Roza Pati, Professor of Law and Executive Director of the Intercultural Human Rights program at St. Thomas University, and Dr. Roger Clark of Rutgars University School of Law and a former member of the United Nations Committee on Crime Prevention and Control. The discussion focused on the 1973 International Crimes (Tribunals) Act which the Bangladesh government will use as the legal framework for the upcoming Genocide trials. It was pointed out by the panel that the 1973 Act defines genocide more broadly than the legal definition of genocide used in International Law. Specifically, the 1973 Act adds acts against a “political group” to the crime of genocide as defined by the 1951 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Given that the 1973 Act was passed after the crimes of 1971, there is a serious question as to the fairness of the trials if charges are brought against the perpetrators using the expanded definition of genocide beyond what is defined in International Law. In a subsequent conversation I asked Dr. Matas, given the problems with the 1973 Act, should the Bangladesh government go ahead with the Genocide Trials under the Act. He pointed out that it was important to get the process of the trials going, even with the flaws in the Act. He said as long as the charges stayed within the genocide defined in International Law, there was no need to rework the 1973 Act further to maintain the fairness and legitimacy of the trials.

Apart from a few minor hiccups, the conference was a success and a major step forward in the study of the 1971 genocide. I commend the organizers for their continued dedication to the important work that needs to be done. Important issues were raised at this conference. I hope these issues will be addressed.

The conference at Kean highlighted the embarrassing dereliction of duty by the Bangladesh government in preserving for posterity the history of the genocide of 1971. Apart from a wholly inadequate attempt in the early 1980s to bring together and document eyewitness accounts and historical records from the genocide, the failure of the government has been total. It should be a badge of shame for the government that it is left to private citizens to launch efforts like the Liberation War Museum to do what their government should have been doing. The government’s failure has been directly responsible for the distortion of Bangladesh’s history and for the lack of substantial scholarship surrounding one of the most concentrated acts of genocide in modern history. The conference at Kean was a clarion call to the Government of Bangladesh to do what it must do and should do to fulfill its obligations to its citizens and to those who gave their lives in the bloody birth of the country.

Another key takeaway from the conference is the importance of holding Genocide trials that are not only fair but that are seen to be fair as well. The Bangladesh government has a responsibility to the victims as well as posterity to see to it that it maintains the integrity of the upcoming trials. To this end, it should heed advice from international legal experts as it follows through with its obligation to try those responsible for the 1971 Genocide and to bring a measure of justice after nearly four decades of delay.

In terms of who the Bangladesh government intends to prosecute, a comment made by Ambassador Qader during his speech bothered me greatly. I did not get a chance to ask him to clarify his comments, so it is possible that he (I hope) misspoke. The Ambassador mentioned that the Bangladesh government only intends to bring charges against Bangladeshi citizens during the Genocide trials. He said that this decision was made so as not to “upset” foreign governments (read Pakistan and countries of the OIC). This, it seems to me, is a bizarre criteria to use in the pursuit of justice. I can understand the need to first bring to justice those that are within Bangladesh’s jurisdiction. But to exclude those that do not hold Bangladeshi citizenship is wrongheaded and legally unsound. It is well known that many perpetrators have either fled Bangladesh or were members of the Pakistan army. If Bangladesh government is indeed going to use this criteria for prosecution many key actors will continue to escape justice. Some of these perpetrators have taken shelter in Western countries, including the United Kingdom and the United States. To give these perpetrators of genocide continued impunity for their crimes is not only immoral, but will do nothing to convince future perpetrators that the world is serious about preventing genocide. In effect, the government of Bangladesh is saying this: that if you commit a murder or rape in Bangladesh, all you need do to escape justice is flee to another country and become its citizen. This stance will make a mockery of justice. I hope either the Ambassador misspoke or that the Bangladesh government will reconsider its ill considered stance.