Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Let the Sunshine In [John Lott debunks DNC's Fla. election 2000 lies ~ again]
National Review ^ | Dec. 10, 2003 | John R. Lott Jr.

Posted on 12/10/2003 9:56:19 AM PST by Ragtime Cowgirl

 

Let the Sunshine In
The same old myths live on about Florida, Nov. 2000.

By John R. Lott Jr.

Headlines this weekend recited the old line "Dems accuse Bush of stealing the 2000 election." Former U.S. Representative Carrie Meek received a wildly enthusiastic response from delegates to the Florida Democratic convention with calls that "We should be ready for revenge!" Retired General Wesley Clark told delegates he fought for democracy and free elections in Vietnam and Europe only to see "the taking" of the presidency by Republicans in 2000. Senator John Edwards said, "We had more votes; we won!" Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts said: "None of us are going to forget." More vaguely, Senator Joe Lieberman claimed that Bush "stretched the truth" to get his way in 2000. Of course, Terry McAuliffe was beating the same old drum. They should all get over it.

The stolen election supposedly incorporated many wrongs, but foremost was discrimination against Democratic African-American voters: Faulty voting machines were said to have thrown out their votes at higher rates. Also included are claims that the voters' intent wasn't properly divined, that Republicans on the Supreme Court felt compelled to covertly snatch the election, and that African-Americans were intimidated into not voting or were erroneously placed on the ineligible list at higher rates than other racial groups.

These charges have been rebutted before, but with so much misinformation and people's short memories simply accepting the charges, many risk believing that they are true. There has also been new research — of which most people may not be aware — which helps replace myth with reality.

1. THE MYTH OF THE FLAWED VOTING MACHINES & DEMOCRATIC DISENFRANCHISEMENT

Suppose spoiled or non-voted ballots really did indicate disenfranchisement, rather than voter preferences. Then, according to the precinct-level vote data compiled by USA Today and other newspapers, the group most victimized in the Florida voting was African-American Republicans, and by a dramatic margin, too.

Earlier this year I published an article in the Journal of Legal Studies analyzing the USA Today data, and it shows that African-American Republicans who voted were 54 to 66 times more likely than the average African American to cast a non-voted ballot (either by not marking that race or voting for too many candidates). To put it another way: For every two additional black Republicans in the average precinct, there was one additional non-voted ballot. By comparison, it took an additional 125 African Americans (of any party affiliation) in the average precinct to produce the same result.

Some readers may be surprised that black Republicans even exist in Florida, but, in fact, there are 22,270 such registered voters — or about one for every 20 registered black Democrats. This is a large number when you consider that the election in the state was decided by fewer than 1,000 votes. Since these Republicans were more than 50 times more likely to suffer non-voted ballots than other African Americans, the reasonable conclusion is that George W. Bush was penalized more by the losses of African-American votes than Al Gore.

Democrats have also claimed that low-income voters suffered non-voted ballots disproportionately. Yet, the data decisively reject this conclusion. For example, the poorest voters, those in households making less than $15,000 a year, had non-voted ballots at less than one-fifteenth the rate of voters in families making over $500,000.

It is difficult to believe that wealthy people were more confused by the ballot than poor people. Perhaps the rich or black Republicans simply did not like the choices for president and so did not vote on that part of the ballot. Perhaps there was tampering, but it is difficult to see how it could have been carried out and covered up. We may never know, but, clearly, the figures show that income and race were only one-third as important in explaining non-voted ballots as the methods and machines used in voting. For example, setting up the names in a straight line appears to produce many fewer problems than listing names on different pages or in separate columns.

2. THE MYTH THAT AFRICAN AMERICANS WERE INCORRECTLY PLACED ON THE CONVICTED-FELONS LIST AT A HIGHER RATE THAN OTHER GROUPS

The evidence on convicted felons comes from the U.S. Civil Rights Commission's Majority Report, which states: "The chance of being placed on this list [the exclusion list] in error is greater if the voter is African-American." The evidence they provide indicates that African-Americans had a greater share of successful appeals. However, since African-Americans also constituted an even greater share of the list to begin with, whites were actually the most likely to be erroneously on the list (a 9.9-percent error rate for whites versus only a 5.1-percent error rate for blacks). The rate for Hispanics (8.7 percent) is also higher than for blacks. The Commission's own table thus proves the opposite of what they claim. A greater percentage of whites and Hispanics who were placed on the disqualifying list were originally placed there in error.

In any case, this evidence has nothing to do with whether people were in the end improperly prevented from voting, and there are no data presented on that point. The Majority Report's evidence only examines those who successfully appealed and says nothing about how many of those who didn't appeal could have successfully done so.

3. THE MYTH THAT GORE WOULD HAVE WON IF RECOUNT HAD ONLY BEEN ALLOWED
There were two news consortiums conducting massive recounts of Florida's ballots. One group was headed by USA Today and the Miami Herald. The other one was headed by eight newsgroups including the Washington Post, New York Times, L.A. Times, Chicago Tribune, the Associated Press, and CNN. Surprisingly, the two groups came to very similar conclusions. To quote from the USA Today group's findings (May 11, 2001) on different recounts:

Who would have won if Al Gore had gotten the manual counts he requested in four counties? Answer: George W. Bush.

Who would have won if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the hand recount of undervotes, which are ballots that registered no machine-readable vote for president? Answer: Bush, under three of four standards.

Who would have won if all disputed ballots — including those rejected by machines because they had more than one vote for president — had been recounted by hand? Answer: Bush, under the two most widely used standards; Gore, under the two least used.

Of course, Florida law provided no mechanism to ask for a statewide recount a la the last option, only county-by-county recounts. And of course neither Gore's campaign nor the Florida Supreme Court ever asked for such a recount.

4. DON'T FORGET THE EARLY MEDIA CALL

Florida polls were open until 8 P.M. on election night. The problem was that Florida's ten heavily Republican western-panhandle counties are on Central, not Eastern, time. When polls closed at 8 P.M. EST in most of the state, the western-panhandle polling places were still open for another hour. Yet, at 8 Eastern, all the networks (ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and NBC) incorrectly announced many times over the next hour that the polls were closed in the entire state. CBS national news made 18 direct statements that the polls had closed.

Polling conducted after the election indicates that the media had an impact on voter behavior, and that the perception of Democratic wins discouraged Republican voters. Democratic strategist Bob Beckel concluded Mr. Bush suffered a net loss of up to 8,000 votes in the panhandle after Florida was called early for Gore. Another survey of western-panhandle voters conducted by John McLaughlin & Associates, a Republican polling company, immediately after the election estimated that the early call cost Bush approximately 10,000 votes.

Using voting data for presidential elections from 1976 to 2000, my own own empirical estimates that attempted to control for a variety of factors affecting turnout imply that Bush received as many as 7,500 to 10,000 fewer votes than he would normally have expected. Little change appears to have occurred in the rate that non-Republicans voted.

Terry McAuliffe clearly stated his strategy "to use the anger and resentment that will come out of that 2000 election, put it in a positive way to energize the Democratic base." Democrats have used the notion that Bush is an illegitimate president to justify everything from their harsh campaign rhetoric to their filibusters against his judicial appointments.

More could be said about these myths, but most of them hardly merit discussion. Unfortunately, as Terry McAuliffe implies, these falsehoods will continue to be trumpeted frequently over the next year; thankfully, a few facts can help dispel them.

— John Lott is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. His data on the Florida 2000 election may be found at www.johnrlott.com.



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: floridarecount; johnlott; scoflaw; scoflaws

1 posted on 12/10/2003 9:56:20 AM PST by Ragtime Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Hang on to for reference..
2 posted on 12/10/2003 10:01:21 AM PST by GrandEagle (I would like to say a hearty, heart felt THANKS to those who served in our nations armed forces.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JulieRNR21; MinuteGal; summer; Joe Brower; AAABEST; floriduh voter; windchime; NautiNurse; ...
If they insist on living in the past, we can throw them an anchor.

John Lott, Jr. with a helpful recap of the Dem-press fibs.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A little of what Florida Freepers learned in 2000:

8 Clintons and other left-wing liars [what I KNOW about election 2000]

3 posted on 12/10/2003 10:02:13 AM PST by Ragtime Cowgirl ( "Our military is full of the finest people on the face of the earth." ~ Pres. Bush, Baghdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Polling conducted after the election indicates that the media had an impact on voter behavior, and that the perception of Democratic wins discouraged Republican voters. Democratic strategist Bob Beckel concluded Mr. Bush suffered a net loss of up to 8,000 votes in the panhandle after Florida was called early for Gore. Another survey of western-panhandle voters conducted by John McLaughlin & Associates, a Republican polling company, immediately after the election estimated that the early call cost Bush approximately 10,000 votes.

And cost Bush one to three MILLION votes in the rest of the country.

4 posted on 12/10/2003 10:04:53 AM PST by Timesink (I'm not a big fan of electronic stuff, you know? Beeps ... beeps freak me out. They're bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
The Number One reason why Gore is not running this year is he knows he'll get a royal shellacking, especially in Florida. By not running he gets to hang on to the myths.
5 posted on 12/10/2003 10:08:10 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
bump
6 posted on 12/10/2003 10:11:51 AM PST by zook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
---and increases my contempt for people who don't vote because of what they hear from the media on early election results--
7 posted on 12/10/2003 10:16:48 AM PST by rellimpank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
What is the supposed mechanism by which a ballot becomes "dimpled" ? Realistically that is. We're talking a piece of paper here, after all. Is it really that tough to punch a hole?

Or is it a matter of taking a stack of ballots and ramming a long piece of metal through them, oh, say, a coat hanger?

The first mistake as I see it in any case, an invalid ballot gets thrown out, period. If a voter makes a mistake by voting for two candidates, or whatnot - them's the breaks, simply because elections are not an infinite open-ended process. There is a starting point, and an end point. Fair is fair and "I want to vote again because my guy lost" doesn't seem to pass the smell test.

Democrats should be ashamed, but that's not how they work, and the rest of us better wake up to that fact and quick.
8 posted on 12/10/2003 10:17:52 AM PST by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Of course, Florida law provided no mechanism to ask for a statewide recount a la the last option, only county-by-county recounts. And of course neither Gore's campaign nor the Florida Supreme Court ever asked for such a recount.

Someone suggested that Gore's first reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in December 2000 should have been to file civil charges against David Boies for providing incompetent legal counsel, and then seek to have his license to practice law rescinded. The Gore case was effectively a lost cause once they decided to order recounts with different counting standards only in certain counties -- this was such a blatant violation of U.S. election law that the U.S. Supreme Court had no choice but to determine that it was not a valid recount process.

9 posted on 12/10/2003 10:21:43 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Bump!
10 posted on 12/10/2003 10:27:07 AM PST by WorkingClassFilth (DEFUND NPR & PBS - THE AMERICAN PRAVDA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Bookmark bump. Thanks for this; I suspect it'll come in handy in the next year!
11 posted on 12/10/2003 10:29:47 AM PST by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Bumped for reference.
12 posted on 12/10/2003 10:35:02 AM PST by Bubba_Leroy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Excellent post - will keep - thanks!
13 posted on 12/10/2003 10:40:02 AM PST by talleyman (God bless FR & Merry Christmas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Reference BUMP
14 posted on 12/10/2003 10:41:32 AM PST by spodefly (This is my tagline. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
If the Dems decide to fight the '04 election over "The Florida Fiasco" they may well end up with copious amounts of egg on their faces when the dust settles and the votes are counted. This could be a political miscalculation of epic proportions but they're so big on themselves they can't see the hole they're about to fall into.

Consider...

Floridians will be treated to endless stories in the press about the "stolen" 2000 election. Implicit in this argument are two things: Floridians are too stupid to fill out a ballot correctly and/or they're a bunch of racists who deny Blacks their constitutional right to cast a ballot. How do they think that will play with Floridians? Of course the Dems will think they're telling the people that they were disenfranchised but the message they will get is that the state and its citizens are being held up to ridicule before the entire country. For months on end. Not a wise idea, IMHO. Couple that with the presence of a popular governor and some swing in the Jewish vote which appears inevitable and the Bush margin of victory in Florida could be quite high. Meanwhile, the rest of the nation sees the spectacle of the Dems fighting the election over a non-existant issue from the last one instead of looking forward. Bad move (well, from my perspective a great one if it helps Bush get reelected).

Dems just think they're so much smarter than everyone else that they are blind to the fact that many folks strongly resent "big city outsiders" coming in and telling them how to think, especially when the implied message is that the people don't know how to think for themselves.

McAwful has made it clear the election will be fought over Florida. Given his track record, perhaps we should encourage him, no?

15 posted on 12/10/2003 10:46:55 AM PST by mitchbert (Facts are Stubborn Things)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
If I'm not mistaken, the following represents a "coded message" from John Lott regarding the political-crime-that-date-not-speak-it's-name, otherwise known as DEMOCRAT VOTE FRAUD perpetrated by election officials in dem districts.

..African-American Republicans who voted were 54 to 66 times more likely than the average African American to cast a non-voted ballot (either by not marking that race or voting for too many candidates). [WL-law note: This could be accomplished by destroying their ballot and substituting it with a non-voted ballot (case A) or punching an additional chad out, disqualifying via multiple votes (case B)] To put it another way: For every two additional black Republicans in the average precinct, there was one additional non-voted ballot. By comparison, it took an additional 125 African Americans (of any party affiliation) in the average precinct to produce the same result.[WL-law note: Meaning one in every three African-American votes were tampered with -- and I suspect there are deeper patterns, i.e., concentration within districts, that point even more conclusively to fraud]

Some readers may be surprised that black Republicans even exist in Florida, but, in fact, there are 22,270 such registered voters — or about one for every 20 registered black Democrats. This is a large number when you consider that the election in the state was decided by fewer than 1,000 votes. Since these Republicans were more than 50 times more likely to suffer non-voted ballots than other African Americans, the reasonable conclusion is that George W. Bush was penalized more by the losses of African-American votes than Al Gore.

Democrats have also claimed that low-income voters suffered non-voted ballots disproportionately. Yet, the data decisively reject this conclusion. For example, the poorest voters, those in households making less than $15,000 a year, had non-voted ballots at less than one-fifteenth the rate of voters in families making over $500,000. [Similarly, were these non-voters concentrated in certain districts? I think John Lott may know but is being discreet in his accusations...]

It is difficult to believe that wealthy people were more confused by the ballot than poor people.[WL-law note: Not likely] Perhaps the rich or black Republicans simply did not like the choices for president and so did not vote on that part of the ballot. .[WL-law note: Not likely]Perhaps there was tampering, .[WL-law note: BINGO !!] but it is difficult to see how it could have been carried out and covered up. We may never know, but, clearly, the figures show that income and race were only one-third as important in explaining non-voted ballots as the methods and machines used in voting.

I have always thought that massive fraud was carried out on election day. I think it was well-planned, on a national scale, by Donna Brazile and others. Remember that all national polls conducted days before the election had Bush comfortably in front. Remember that Gore went on a 24-hour marathon campaigning swing, in my view to create "plausible cover" for the vote swing to follow.

16 posted on 12/10/2003 10:47:21 AM PST by WL-law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Don't forget the 10,000 military votes that were voided by the Dimocrats.

Don't forget the 400 people being bused from New Jersey to Florida to vote by the Dimocrats.

Don't forget the Dimocrat woman that registered her dog to vote.

Don't forget the Florida Dimocrat Politician caught with voting machines in his car.

Don't forget the man that was working in one of the recounts that was observed eating chads from the ballots.

17 posted on 12/10/2003 10:54:55 AM PST by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Great post!
18 posted on 12/10/2003 10:58:49 AM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Thanks I just heard the stupidity out of someone's mouth yesterday. I just sent him the item.
19 posted on 12/10/2003 11:05:01 AM PST by bmwcyle (Hillary's election to President will start a civil war)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
"We had more votes; we won!" Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts said"

Huh? I must have missed that part.

20 posted on 12/10/2003 11:11:11 AM PST by sweetliberty (Better to keep silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
bttt
21 posted on 12/10/2003 11:21:55 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
Don't forget that the Gore headquarters (Daley) contacted a public relations firm in Texarkana that was calling black voters in Florida before the polls closed to tell them they were "disenfranchized".
22 posted on 12/10/2003 11:24:30 AM PST by OrioleFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
It is difficult to believe that wealthy people were more confused by the ballot than poor people. Perhaps the rich or black Republicans simply did not like the choices for president and so did not vote on that part of the ballot. Perhaps there was tampering, but it is difficult to see how it could have been carried out and covered up.

Pretty simply, actually. There are two ways to tamper. Produce votes for one candidate, or steal them from another. Stats conveniently ignored are that Gore had already carried Broward and Palm Beach County by larger percentages than he statistically would be expected to. If you put 10 or 15 ballots in a voting machine and punched through the Gore slot, all of the Gore votes would be unaffected. However, the Bush and Buchanan votes would now be double-votes, hence, thrown out. Non-votes become Gore votes. This would also produce the dimpled or pregnant chads you heard so much about, as it is more difficult to push through 10 cards than one. There was rampant fraud. They just didn't steal enough votes.

Couple of Democrat techniques from back in the Lyndon Johnson days:

Make your bought precinct the last one to report so you'll know how many votes to steal

If it gets tight, keep doing recounts until you're ahead, then declare the election over.

The Gore team successfully did the first, and almost pulled off the second.

23 posted on 12/10/2003 11:30:55 AM PST by Richard Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
"Faulty voting machines were said to have thrown out their votes at higher rates."

Oh yeah, I forgot all about the racist voting machines. One of our most effective tools.< /sarcasm >

"Also included are claims that the voters' intent wasn't properly divined"

Note to election commitees, especially in Florida, get psychic voting machines or at least require election judges to be psychics.

"Democrats have also claimed that low-income voters suffered non-voted ballots disproportionately."

I guess they just didn't have enough money to pay someone to punch their ballot correctly....probably too weak from hunger. < /sarcasm >

"Perhaps there was tampering"

Ya think? DUH!

Terry McAuliffe clearly stated his strategy "to use the anger and resentment that will come out of that 2000 election, put it in a positive way to energize the Democratic base."

When did revenge become a positive? And especially when you consider that the wrong done them is only in their minds. They're just mad because their guy didn't succeed in stealing the election. The fix was in and they still lost lost. Boo..freakin'...hoo. Yeah, revenge...that'll inspire a lot of voters. morons and jackasses...every last one of them.

24 posted on 12/10/2003 11:36:36 AM PST by sweetliberty (Better to keep silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball
Make your bought precinct the last one to report so you'll know how many votes to steal

This is why, IMHO, the vote sampling / exit-polling syndicate (I forget its name)was willing to make early "Gore wins" calls for the close states with-Gore-leading, but reluctant to do the same for "not-so-close-races'with-Bush-leading". It's because they know, statistically, that there is a sneaky prediliction for late-reporting counties to switch the outcome, always from inner-city and other dem districts.

25 posted on 12/10/2003 11:39:13 AM PST by WL-law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US
"Democrats should be ashamed"

That would require a conscience. I have seen little evidence to suggest that more than a very few of them possess one.

26 posted on 12/10/2003 11:47:31 AM PST by sweetliberty (Better to keep silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball
I am convinced that a lot of RAT voter fraud would be curtailed if ALL precincts and ALL counties had to have declared their vote counts before even the first one could be reported publicly! Sure, there'd still be fraud, but I think that would also make it easier to catch...if there were a will to stop it. If prosecution for voter fraud were swift, public and severe, it would definitely make some of them think twice before doing it.
27 posted on 12/10/2003 12:01:39 PM PST by sweetliberty (Better to keep silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
Does anyone know if the network's calling of states will be done differently in '04? I think I rmember some chatter about this since the last debacle.
28 posted on 12/10/2003 12:09:08 PM PST by Florida_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
Exactly!! Meaning THE MEDIA CHEATED Bush out of also getting the popular vote.
29 posted on 12/10/2003 12:42:15 PM PST by CyberAnt (America .. the LIGHT of the World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
I've sent this excellent article to media outlets & several columnists......BTTT
30 posted on 12/10/2003 1:47:37 PM PST by JulieRNR21 (One good term deserves another! Take W-04....Across America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
The Gore case was effectively a lost cause once they decided to order recounts with different counting standards only in certain counties

Actually it was the counties that chose different standards. Credit where credit is due. There were Democrat controlled boards in all the contested counties, but not all were equally willing to cheat for Gore. A couple tried, at least initially, to follow Florida law and their own precedents, and do a fair recount. That, of course, didn't manufacture appreciable numbers of Gore votes.

One of the highlights of the whole fiasco was the Gore campaign suing a Democrat board in midcount -- after the ballot patterns had been analyzed -- to force it to shift to a more subjective standard. The DUmmies forget that part -- Gore suing honest Democrats to force them to cheat.

31 posted on 12/10/2003 3:02:34 PM PST by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Reason and truth are not dem strong points.
32 posted on 12/10/2003 5:36:08 PM PST by windchime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: windchime; JulieRNR21
We should encourage the DNC to do it again. DNC election 2002: "revenge of the disenfranchised Dem 2000 voters!"
 
"Jeb is gone!" Mr. McAuliffe declared brazenly, brushing aside the determination of the White House to protect the president's brother. "There won't be anything as devastating to President Bush as his brother's losing in Florida."    --Terry McAuliffe, DNC Chairman, NY Times, Oct. 23, 2002
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Nov. 5, 2002, Florida voters, both Republican and Democrat, voted fair and square (again) and 1) re-elected Jeb Bush, a Republican Governor - first Republican Governor reelected in Florida's history, 2) elected Katherine Harris (R) to Congress, 3) gave Florida a 100% Republican Cabinet, 4) elected a majority of Republicans to the Florida House, 5) didn't elect Al Gore's Florida campaign manager and former attorney general Bob Butterworth, or 6) Carol Roberts, Palm Beach County Democrat and election accuser; 7) Republicans took back the federal Senate, 8) Republican Governors won across the nation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
After being told by the DNC leaders that Florida voters would turn out in droves to avenge election 2000 ~ Florida voters did turn out ~ and overwhelmingly validated election 2000.
 
How did the 'unbiased press' deal with this amazing election?  By giving "we the people" a week of NANCY PELOSI, newly elected Democrat House minority leader.

33 posted on 12/10/2003 7:30:39 PM PST by Ragtime Cowgirl ( "Our military is full of the finest people on the face of the earth." ~ Pres. Bush, Baghdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: WL-law
Remember that all national polls conducted days before the election had Bush comfortably in front. Remember that Gore went on a 24-hour marathon campaigning swing, in my view to create "plausible cover" for the vote swing to follow.

Remember that nearly all accusations of Dems not being able to vote, or related irregularities were in counties where the voting mechanisms were controlled by Dems, and often in precincts where there were no Republican representatives.

34 posted on 12/10/2003 8:12:15 PM PST by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
bump
35 posted on 02/26/2004 6:08:04 AM PST by jonno (We are NOT a democracy - though we are democratic. We ARE a constitutional republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bump for reference
36 posted on 02/26/2004 7:29:24 AM PST by CollegeRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
I meant to link this for you last time. One very positive outcome from election 2000 ~ we learned we could make a difference: *** Our Side Found Heart ***
37 posted on 02/26/2004 10:24:19 AM PST by Ragtime Cowgirl ("(We)..come to rout out tyranny from its nest. Confusion to the enemy." - B. Taylor, US Marine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson