A mind is a terrible thing to waste,
but Krugman manages to do so weekly.
With such brilliance, shouldn't he be nominated
as the Dems' presidential candidate in 2008?
Posted on 08/21/2005 10:05:43 PM PDT by RWR8189
The 2000 election is still an open sore on the body politic. That was clear from the outraged reaction to my mention last week of what would have happened with a full statewide manual recount of Florida.
This reaction seems to confuse three questions. One is what would have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court hadn't intervened; the answer is that unless the judge overseeing the recount had revised his order (which is a possibility), George W. Bush would still have been declared the winner.
The second is what would have happened if there had been a full, statewide manual recount - as there should have been. The probable answer is that Al Gore would have won, by a tiny margin.
The third is what would have happened if the intentions of the voters hadn't been frustrated by butterfly ballots, felon purges and more; the answer is that Mr. Gore would have won by a much larger margin.
About the evidence regarding a manual recount: in April 2001 a media consortium led by The Miami Herald assessed how various recounts of "undervotes," which did not register at all, would have affected the outcome. Two out of three hypothetical statewide counts would have given the election to Mr. Gore. The third involved a standard that would have discarded some ballots on which the intended vote was clear. Since Florida law seemed to require counting such ballots, this standard almost certainly wouldn't have been used in a statewide recount.
The Herald group later did an analysis of "overvotes," in which more than one choice was recorded, but this wasn't a true recount, because some of it was based on computer records rather than the ballots themselves.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
What has he ever contributed to economics?
Paul Krugman is a boil on journalism's butt.
Where's that crying baby DIM logo?
IIRC he was hired to write about economics.
Ha ha, Paul, Gore lost.
Keep on whining about it though, it's such a great strategy for attracting voters.
Can you imagine the uproar if it'd been the other way around, and Dubya had tried to get them to count ballots off the discard pile?
I guess he's referring to the hypothetical recounts held in Bizarro-World. Algore would have lost under most scenarios...IIRC, Algore only won the scenario where everything was counted by creating new law with each ballot.
The simple fact that this guy (Krugman) is still writing about the 2000 election is proof of just how shallow he is. WHAT A PATHETIC LOSER
Nothing other than some warmed-over revanchist Marxist kwapola, if truth be told.
Well I shouldn't expect it to appear the New York Times.
>>>Paul Krugman is a boil on journalism's butt.
A pustulant one at best...
Shouldn't that be a boil on a Clymer?
The NYT can keep it up with guys like this POS, Rich, Dowd, etc. When it's all said and done, their stock will be next to worthless.
It’s ”probable” that Monkeys will be flying out my… any minute now.
A Krugman story is always good for a couple laughs.
Jeeze. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt, or something like that. These punks think if they repeat their lies about the 2000 election long enough, they'll become true. I really wonder if any RATS really believe this crap.
Krugman and the dems never mention that the media called florida early costing Bush thousands of votes studies have shown in the panhandle conservative area. Media knew the panhandle closed an hour later and robbed Bush by calling the election early.
Can you imagine if the media waited till the conservative areas where closed and called the election before the liberal big cities closed the dems would be in an uproar.
Also Al Gore had his lawyers successfully argue that overseas military ballots shouldn't count because they didn't have the right stamp on them.
About 2,000 military ballots weren't counted because of that coward gore. Bush won the other military ballots 2 to 1 in florida so bush would have gotten about 1350 to 650 which cost bush another 700 votes.
Between the media calling florida early before the panhandle polls closed and gore lawyers preventing military ballots to be counted gore should have been disgraced, but in our media he was made to be the victim.
A total pain in any case.
And, yeah, the word "Clymer" works for me.
I'm so tired of this. The last recount started was flawed. The re-wrote the software to have the punch card machines kick out the undervotes, then they were going to look at them manually.
However, this new software would not count the other ballots. And since the chads were flipping back and forth, there was no chance that the cards picked to be "recounted" were the same cards as had been rejected in previous counts.
In other words, they were taking a vote total from some previous run, and then adding into that total manual decisions from a new sorting of the cards; so some cards would never be counted, and some would be counted twice.
The evidence for this was there, but the lawyers didn't catch it. In one precinct that was being held by the judge in the specific case, the total number of cards was greater than the number of undervotes previously recorded in the race.
The fact is, there was no method of counting that would get you the same answer twice. Given that truth, picking ANY count was just a random choice. Just like in Washington where they counted three times, and chose to keep the LAST count, the only won the democrat came out ahead, even though there was NO REASON to believe that a full manual recount could possibly be as accurate as letting the machines count it.
If I take a few million coins to the bank, and they ask me whether I want them counted manually or by machine, I chose the machine every time.
And they were quick to call close Gore states while being slow to call comfortable Bush states. I think this depressed Republican voting turnout on the west coast. I think it also might have been a factor in Slade Gorton losing his senate seat.
Paul Krugman is a stupid putz.
Early call cost Bush 8000-10,000 votes minimum. Then there is the issue of the military votes. Krugman is indulging in his persistant, favorite, moaning fantasy-then he opens his eyes.
BBBBWWWWWWHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAA.
If we count what voters INTENDED to do, but didn't, then you have to count voters who INTENDED to
come to the polls, but didn't, and voters, like my elderly mother, who meant to send in her absentee ballot for Bush, but didn't.
In this direction lies quagmire.
And if you can't figure out how the ballot works---like the "butterfly" voters---then you're too dumb to cast an intelligent vote anyway.
In truth, the Florida legislature had the final say on which electors to send to Congress and the House the final say on which electors to accept, so even without the Supreme Court ruling,
Bush would have won anyway---at the expense of long, drawn-out battle which would have damaged the country.
The truth is, 2000 was a virtual tie and in our system, ties go to whichever party controls most of the existing institutions of government.
Truth is, the lefties yelp about the Constitution, but don't like it when it produces a result that
displeases them.
"The 2000 election is still an open sore on the body politic."
Krugman is an open sore on the body politic. Where's that picture of the crying baby?
ALL RIGHT NOW!
Who taught Krugman the expression 'Body Politic'???
You *know* he didn't come by it honestly.
:oP
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2001-05-10-recountmain.htm
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 3 of 4 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 2 most widely used standards; Gore, under the 2 least used.
Over 170,000 overvotes and undervotes were counted. The margin of victory results are based on the four voting standards:
Lenient:
Gore by 332 votes
Palm Beach:
Gore by 242 votes
2-corner:
Bush by 407 votes
Strict:
Bush by 152 votes
Paul, read your own paper, would ya?
New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html?ei=5070&en=59594c45b66eb9fa&ex=1064030400&pagewanted=print
November 12, 2001
Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote
By FORD FESSENDEN and JOHN M. BRODER
A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.
Actually there was a time when he produced some sane pieces, including arguing correctly for policies of expansion or restriction in one or another scenario, or for economic liberalization when it mattered, as with Japan.
My belief is that he wrote a few good columns while still a young man, had an MIT background, and so made a bit of a splash early.
He's not the economist he claims to be, though. I know he's been keen on the Nobel, who would smile approvingly on his NYT columns, but he can't hold a candle to Mankiew or Bernanke.
I find him unreadable. Much like the shrewish Maureen Dowd.
Oh well, Gore should have sued to have a statewide recount then, as stipulated by Florida law, instead of sueing for an illegal recount in only Democratic Counties
Just the fact they they have 9 hypthoetical ways to make a recount of the votes shows how out of touch with reality they are. There is only one way to count the votes, that proscribed by Florida law. Coming up with "hypotheticals" show they have no respect for law and the inentions of the voter and that they are only concerned with what it takes for their guy to "win".
You aren't kidding. The Florida 2000 fiasco was created by the MSM and the Dims. Bush should have (and would have) won big in Florida hadn't it been for the MSM and the Algore campaign (one and the same.)
They tried the same junk in 2004, by the way. Ohio (a comfortable Bush win) was declared "too close to call", while Wisconsin (for one) was declared a solid sKerry victory with 1000's of votes left to count.
I believe this is an attempt to start saying that if the rightful, in their minds, winner of the 2000 election, Algore, were president we wouldn't be in, again in their minds, the mess we are in over in Iraq and are soldiers would not have died.
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.