Gore v. Bush Florida Recount via Newspaper...

[Darkhawk32]

Can anybody find me a link to that info showing Gore would've won?

[MelissaB]

1. Here ya go..

Google is your friend.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/111201a.html

[Darkhawk32]

2. Thanks for the link... I'd be googling for hours trying to get the right..

keywords. :-)

[MelissaB]

4. I typed in

"Gore won Florida". I just did this search for myself a few weeks ago because this was "news" to me. I'm still a newbie to politics and learning more every day. :)

[Darkhawk32]

9. I need to learn to K.I.S.S. LOL n/t

[MelissaB]

10. You can do

a google then hit "news" and it will give you news articles. If you hit "date" it puts them in chronological order.

My apologies if you already knew this. The teacher in me wants to help. ;)

[MelissaB]

3. A classic from Common Dreams

http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1115-02.htm

Published on Thursday, November 15, 2001 in the Long Island, NY Newsday
Not That It Was Reported, but Gore Won
by Jim Naureckas

IN JOURNALISM, it's called "burying the lead": A story starts off with what everyone already knows, while the real news - the most surprising, significant or never-been-told-before information - gets pushed down where people are less likely to see it.

That's what happened to the findings of the media study of the uncounted votes from last year's Florida presidential vote. A consortium of news outlets - including The New York Times, The Washington Post, Tribune Co. (Newsday's parent company), The Wall Street Journal, Associated Press and CNN - spent nearly a year and $900,000 reexamining every disputed ballot.

The consortium determined that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed the ongoing recount to go through, George W. Bush would still likely have ended up in the White House. That's because the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court - as well as the more limited recount asked for by Democratic candidate Al Gore - only involved so-called undervotes, ballots that when counted mechanically registered no choice for president.

[MelissaB]

5. American Poliltics Journal

http://www.americanpolitics.com/2001gore.html

This looks like an interesting site with a lot of links. I'll try to stop. Sometimes I get carried away with my "research."

[MelissaB]

6. Last one

from Salon

http://dir.salon.com/politics/fix/2001/02/15/political_fix/index.html

[tintin99]

7. unfortunately, when following the actual laws in place at the time ...

"when legal votes were evaluated, based on the standards set in law at the time, Bush won" - from Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000#Media_post-electoral_studies.2Frecounts

[MelissaB]

8. Continue to read the other articles

and do some research. The Supreme Court stopped the recount and by any standard, Gore won.

[genieroze]

12. The standards that Jebbie and his cronies at the Supreme Court set. eom

[genieroze]

11. here

http://www.americanpolitics.com/2001gore.html

[Bill Bored]

13. This one!

This is the one everyone likes to say was released the day after 9/11.
It was actually 11/12/01, and don't let the headline fool you either:
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12623-2001Nov11.html>

On edit, let me say that there is a ton of misinformation about this, even from our side. But I think this is one of the best studies, if not THE best.

It's true that Gore originally asked for only a few counties, but the courts said to do the whole state, then they ran out of time because of the Electoral College Vote, but besides that the SCOTUS stopped the count, because of the time limitation I think. And they didn't count overvotes, only undervotes, and the list goes on!

In any case, because of the Butterfly Ballot and the bogus felons list, it was one close election! Without those, Gore would have won by a landslide, relatively speaking. So you could say Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris and Teresa LePore really "decided" the election.