Skip to comments.Washington Post headline: Study shows recount would have elected Bush
Posted on 11/11/2001 6:51:01 PM PST by dawn53Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:31 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Looks like the Post is following CNN and using a sane headline.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Study: Recounts Would Have Favored BushBy Dan Keating and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, Nov. 12, 2001; Page A01
In all likelihood, George W. Bush still would have won Florida and the presidency last year if either of two limited recounts one requested by Al Gore, the other ordered by the Florida Supreme Court had been completed, according to a study commissioned by The Washington Post and other news organizations.
But if Gore had found a way to trigger a statewide recount of all disputed ballots, or if the courts had required it, the result likely would have been different. An examination of uncounted ballots throughout Florida found enough where voter intent was clear to give Gore the narrowest of margins.
The study showed that if the two limited recounts had not been short-circuited the first by Florida county and state election officials and the second by the U.S. Supreme Court Bush would have held his lead over Gore, with margins ranging from 225 to 493 votes, depending on the standard. But the study also found that whether dimples are counted or a more restrictive standard is used, a statewide tally favored Gore by 60 to 171 votes.
But luckily most people will just read the headline, which tells the real story.
Recounts are limited by State & Federal election laws which require a certification of results at a date certain. GW was certified.
Any challenge to the result ccertified in Florida would have been determined by the US House.
Upshot? GW was elected by every legitimate consideration. THANK G*D!!
....not to mention Dershowitz's stupid book and Buscaglia's stupid book. Them dummy libs sure do put out a lot of stupid books, don't they?
I now take Drudge's scoops with even more salt than I used to. Sheesh!
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. Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court. (end of excerpt)
Hee hee, so even the NY Times is saying Bush won, and have even taken on the issue of the Supreme Court "awarding" the election to Bush. The DemonRATS must be going bonkers!!!
This is NOT A BIG STORY. The election is a year old. Gore campaigned for several candidates last week and they lost. The ones that won didn't want him around. There are many important things happenineg: this is not one of them.
The same thing that's going to happen to Bill and Hillary's. Remainder bin.
All the ones Clinton worked for lost, too.
Times, they is a changing.
And Alan Dershowitz and Vincent Bugliosi and a dozen more ...
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.