Is this editorial lede snarky, or ignorant?

[grasswire]

From Monday's Oregonian:

"As America staggers into its long season of choosing its next president, it's worth reviewing what has changed since almost half of the country's voters picked George W. Bush over Al Gore."

At first, I thought that was a real snarky sentence.

Would it be better to have said "...since more than half of the Supreme Court picked George W. Bush over Al Gore"?

Now I'm just wondering what most people will think of their phrasing. Will Republicans skip over it, or be offended?

The real truth is that we have no firm idea how many voters picked George W. Bush OR Al Gore. Or John Kerry, for that matter.

[Xipe Totec]

1. almost half is less than half

I thought it was a pretty good dig.

[Vincardog]

2. The quote admits jr never won "almost half of the country's voters picked George W. Bush over Al Gor

almost half does not a majority make

[sailor65]

3. Actually, it's perfectly true....

Half would be 50%

More than half of that would be 25.1%

Therefore, it's true enough to say that "Almost" half picked B.

:rofl:

[hayu_lol]

4. Thats typical electioneering on the part of the Orygunian...

Going back in time, day before the election, they endorsed Packwood in a banner headline. Next day, after the voting, they broke the story of Packwood's sticking his tongue in ladies mouths...and other grim stories.

Whoever the Orygunian endorses, you just can't go wrong to vote the other way.

OR-02
Kalamity Flats