Help please with Gore in 2000

[Esse Quam Videri]

Can anyone offer information on whether or not there is any published evidence that Gore won in 2000? I would like to refute a LTTE in my local paper stating "No recount conducted since the Supreme Court decisions of 2000 has ever found Gore to be the winner."

I thought there were some newspapers who did recounts after the decision. What did they find?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fleabert]

4. does it really matter anymore? YES.

because if we don't address and keep addressing the broken voting system then it will happen again and again, no matter who is up against the assholes.

one only need look at 2004 to see this reality.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

2. Do a search for november 12, 2001. The report came out and it

had Gore winning 6 out of 9 scenarios. You might even be able to use the archives here at DU to find it.

[Esse Quam Videri]

6. Little lesson on using the archives?

Would be most appreciated.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

10. Here's the link and use it as a search engine

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=search_advanced&select_forum=104&search_archives=yes

[mattclearing]

3. They found that according to the law,

which stated that votes be counted as to a "clear indication of intent by the voter," a statewide recount would have wound up in Gore's favor.

This was buried at the end of several stories which were headlined, "Recount Would Have Favored Bush," on the basis that the recounts that Gore requested in the four democratic counties would not have been enough to flip the total.

However, if you look into the felon purge, you will see that thousands of eligible and likely Democratic voters were denied their franchise on Election Day 2000, which indicates that Gore was robbed, and it shouldn't have been as close as it was.

links coming in a sec on edit...

Here's one, but it doesn't exactly match what I said:

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html

[WoodrowFan]

5. here you go

it depends on if you count "over votes", i.e. pounching the hole for Gore then ALSO writing him in as an emphasis. In other elections this would have been counted as a (single) vote for Gore, but in Florida in 2000 it was tossed out because they said they could not "discern the will of the voter." :eyes:

http://www.bushwatch.com/gorebush.htm


edited to add the link. DOH! :banghead:

[mattclearing]

8. And many of these had two candidates punched, but in the write in slot,

they clearly said, "I want to vote for Al Gore." Supposedly thousands of these existed (like the butterfly ballot), but were not counted.

[Lasher]

7. See if this link blows your skirt up

http://www.bushwatch.com/gorebush.htm

[farmbo]

9. After 9/11, they all backed off; but by every meaningful std., Gore won...

See this FAIR analysis of the Newspaper Consortium review.

http://www.fair.org/articles/media-recount.html

Under the "reported results" Bush would have won a limited recount focusing on "undervotes" in three counties. However, in a full statewide recount of undervotes and overvotes (e.g. ballots with a check next to Gore plus his name written in), Gore wins easily.
The SCOTUS voted 5-4 to stop such a recount.