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

Skip to comments.

All In All, The Headlines Were Surprisingly Pro-Bush
Boston Globe, L.A. Times, N.Y. Times, Wash. Post ^ | 11/12/2001 | Various

Posted on 11/12/2001 9:03:21 AM PST by stayout

Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:31 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

After hearing that the outcome of the media consortium's recount of the 2000 Florida vote was coming out last night, I was expecting a fiercely pro-Gore spin by all our favorite liberal newspapers. I must say I was pleasantly surprised by the generally neutral to pro-President Bush slant of the headlines (which is the only part most people would read anyway). Here is the results of my impromptu survey: 1. "Slim win-lose scenarios in Fla. vote review" Source: Boston Globe2. "Bush Still Had Votes to Win in a Recount, Study Finds" Source: L.A. Times3. "Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds ...

(Excerpt) Read more at Various ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: floridarecount
Weren't all of you expecting them to sucker punch President Bush as well?
1 posted on 11/12/2001 9:03:22 AM PST by stayout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: stayout
Weren't all of you expecting them to sucker punch President Bush as well?

Yes, but what they did makes sense. I think there would have been a big backlash against the media and DemocRATs if they went against Bush during war time with this. Before 9/11, they would have sucker punched away.

2 posted on 11/12/2001 9:10:55 AM PST by Mannaggia l'America
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stayout
I'm still waiting for:

"STUDY SHOWS THAT IF ALL BUSH VOTES WERE DISCOUNTED, GORE WOULD HAVE PROBABLY WON"

Followed by an angry editorial from Alan Drizzlesh*ts saying that all Bush voters should be impeached.

3 posted on 11/12/2001 9:14:21 AM PST by TheBigB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stayout
bump
4 posted on 11/12/2001 9:17:31 AM PST by ELS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stayout
Weren't all of you expecting them to sucker punch President Bush as well?

If the media could have, they would have done it. Another possibility is that if they had claime that Gore had the most votes, one can be sure the GOP would really dig deep into the rampant vote fraud in Florida and other states.

5 posted on 11/12/2001 9:21:04 AM PST by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stayout
Looks like the only crazy headline about Gore having won was Druge himself.
6 posted on 11/12/2001 9:21:26 AM PST by TheOtherOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheOtherOne
Drudge got more milage out of playing up the "Gore c/would've won under certain circumstances".

He got conservatives and even DUh'ers tuning in to hear his show last night.

7 posted on 11/12/2001 9:26:16 AM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: stayout
None of the stories and the methodololy itself neglected to consider the Military ballots. It looks like they were truncated from this analysis and therefore shifted Gore into winning status in a very few possible scenerios. The net result if the Military ballots are included is that Bush won big!
8 posted on 11/12/2001 9:28:17 AM PST by Surge-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stayout
On CBS hourly radio news late last night they said that if "certain voting standards had been applied", or words to that effect, that Gore would have won. They followed that up with other, but more balanced, info, including the Gore press release saying that the election was effectively over as far as he was concerned. This could conceivably be interpreted as grasping for residual sensationalism rather than bias, but who knows...
9 posted on 11/12/2001 9:28:48 AM PST by SteveH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stayout
I too was a bit surprised by the positive spin from the press. On reflection, however, I believe the media and a whole lot of Gore voters as well recognize that we could have Al Gore along with Sandy Berger, Bill Cohen and Albright in charge now and most journalists I talk to agree are thankful that is not the case
10 posted on 11/12/2001 9:29:24 AM PST by DMZDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mannaggia l'America
>I think there would have been a big backlash against the media and DemocRATs if they went against Bush during war time with this. Before 9/11, they would have sucker punched away

They couldn't go against Bush even if they felt like it - Most of these counts were along the line of "if every ballot" meaning those ballots were nobody voted, where people voted for multiples, etc.

I think even Gore knows it - He knew it when he conceded and he knows it now, else he would be out there crying about it. Even some of the very liberal news media were saying Bush won it.

11 posted on 11/12/2001 9:29:44 AM PST by texlok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TheBigB
LOL! You think they'd get it?
12 posted on 11/12/2001 9:30:32 AM PST by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TheOtherOne
Yeah, after reading Drudge last night, I was prepared for a liberal newspaper whipping today. I was pleasantly surprised that the papers appear to be neutral to pro-Bush. Drudge and his "must cite Drudge" articles are becoming a joke.
13 posted on 11/12/2001 9:31:10 AM PST by Doctor Freeze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: stayout
They new they would look like fools if they bashed Bush now.
14 posted on 11/12/2001 9:31:23 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stayout
After reading the "teasers" from Drudge this weekend, I thought they were going to declare Gore all but President. But the NYT even went so far the opposite way by drawing the logical extension that the Supreme Court didn't change the election, either. A friend of mine commented that this could be a way for the media to get Gore out of the way for a stronger candidate in 2004. That might explain the unexpected interpretation of the analysis. ps: Has anyone else noticed that Drudge has become the bearer of negative news and spin? If there is ANY criticism of the war effort out there, you'll see it mentioned on Drudge first. The Florida ballot spin is another example.
15 posted on 11/12/2001 9:32:37 AM PST by billreillyiii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
Breaking! This Just In!

Bush Wins 47th Recount! 48th recount to start of Algore's birthday! Hope looms on for Algore!

16 posted on 11/12/2001 9:32:47 AM PST by RetiredArmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: stayout
More headlines to ponder -- From Hotline:

Sioux Falls Argus Leader: "Extended Survey Of Disputed Fla. Ballots Finds Virtual Tie"
Burlington Free-Press: "More Voted For Gore, Study Says"
Chicago Tribune: "Florida In The Rearview Mirror"
Chicago Tribune: "Ballots, Rules, Voter Error Led To 2000 Elections Muddle, Review Shows"
Chicago Tribune: "Both Parties Failed To Scrutinize Area With Most Spoiled Ballots"
Chicago Tribune: "Still Too Close To Call"
Los Angeles Times: "GOP Was The Real Victim In Fla. Vote"
New York Daily News: "Full Fla. Recount Favored Gore -- Study"
Detroit Free-Press: "Faulty Voting Machine Part Blamed For Fiasco"
Detroit News: "Recount Gives Florida To Bush"
Los Angeles Times: "Bush Still Had Votes To Win In A Recount, Study Finds"
Los Angeles Times: "Many Voters Simply Did It Wrong"
Los Angeles Times: "Even For Veteran Research Team, It Was New Territory"
Los Angeles Times: "Vote Reform Slow To Come"
Miami Herald: "New Study Shows Bush-Gore Still A Tough Call"
Miami Herald: "Most States Fail To Reform Voting Systems"
Miami Herald: "Faulty Part May Have Voided Ballots"
Miami Herald: "State Repairing Image After Flawed Elections"
Modesto Bee: "Election Result Hinges On Ballot Count Rules That Show Voters' Intentions"
New York Post: "Bush Wins 'Re-Recount' -- Sort Of"
New York Times: "Study Of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast The Deciding Vote"
New York Times: "Who Won Florida? The Answer Emerges, But Surely Not The Final Word"
New York Times: "How The Consortium Of News Organizations Conducted The Ballot Review"
New York Times: "The Time For Ballot Reform"
Orlando Sentinel: "Uncounted Ballots Held Key To Bush-Gore Election"
Orlando Sentinel: "Both Sides Guessed Wrong; In Best Scenario, Gore Would Win By 171"
Orlando Sentinel: "Gore Could Have Overtaken Bush Under New State Rules"
Orlando Sentinel: "It's A Matter Of History, Not Politics"
Orlando Sentinel: "Court-Ordered Recount Was Guessing Game"
Orlando Sentinel: "Detailed Analysis Not Fast Or Cheap"
Orlando Sentinel: "Florida Officials Hope Machines Will Cut Errors"
Orlando Sentinel: "Volusia Down For The Recount"
Palm Beach Post: "Under The Two Most Likely Scenarios, Bush Wins Florida"
Palm Beach Post: "If Clearly Marked 'Over-Votes' Had Counted"
Palm Beach Post: "Statewide Recount Might Have Made Gore A Winner"

Palm Beach Post: "Screen Of Workers Missed Partisan"
Palm Beach Post: "Rights Panel Faults Harris On Handling Of Election Dispute"
San Francisco Chronicle: "Vote Study Concludes Florida Winner Was Bush (Or Maybe Gore)"
Seattle Post-Intelligencer: "Media Review Gives Florida Vote To Bush -- By A Sliver"
St. Petersburg Times: "Recount: Bush"
St. Petersburg Times: "Without Overvotes Gore Was Doomed"
St. Petersburg Times: "Confusion, Inexperience Led 2,500 Voters To Err"
St. Petersburg Times: "Despite Election Fixes, Questions Remain"
Charlotte Sun-Herald: "Voting Equipment Heads Agenda"
Wall Street Journal: "A Review Of Controversial Election Shows Bush Winning A Recount Of Florida Ballots"
Wall Street Journal: "How The Media Consortium Conducted Its Exhaustive Review Of Florida's Ballots"
Wall Street Journal: "One State's Embarrassment Offers Lessons For Others"
Washington Post: "Florida Recounts Would Have Favored Bush"
Washington Post: "Resolving The Dispute Over Dimples"
Washington Post: "A Symbolic, But Muddled, Victory; Cause For Democratic Outrage Is There, Even If The Case Isn't"
Washington Times: "Media Recount Of Florida Ballots Has Mixed Findings"
Washington Times: "Recount Provides No Firm Answers"


The Orlando Sentinel and Burlington Free-Press seem to be the most charitable toward Gore...
17 posted on 11/12/2001 9:33:23 AM PST by Politico2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SteveH
the Gore press release saying that the election was effectively over as far as he was concerned.

He actually took time out from his important new career pounding sand and sucking rocks to issue this brilliant statement?

What's with "effectively?" Did he really say that? What a punk!

18 posted on 11/12/2001 9:35:42 AM PST by PoisedWoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
Prolly not. :)
19 posted on 11/12/2001 9:36:22 AM PST by TheBigB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Freeze
I'm glad I'm not the only one who saw the negative Drudge spin or interpretation of this. Here is Drudge: Under any standard that counted all disputed votes in Florida, Gore erased Bush's advantage and emerged with a tiny lead that ranged from 42 to 171 votes.

And the NYT wrote: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. This is pure anti-Bush spin by Drudge.

20 posted on 11/12/2001 9:37:42 AM PST by billreillyiii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Surge-on
This is the detail that continues to puzzle me. These people just can't scream loud eough "count ALL the votes!" But they have shown no sign of so much as a twinge of indignation over the illegal exclusion of the military absentee ballots and have made no effort to make sure they are included.

So I can only assume from this, that their cry of outrage is really, "count all the non-votes and overvotes that are ordinarily excluded; and if the holes are punched for both Bush and Gore, then it is obvious that it was a stupid voter and we know that stupid voters vote overwhelmingly for Gore, so those votes obviously can't be counted for Bush. The fix was in and we were cheated out of the votes we bought and stole."

21 posted on 11/12/2001 9:43:59 AM PST by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy
And they will still be ordering recounts when Al Gore is sitting in a padded cell in a nursing home somewhere counting ballots and munching on chads.
22 posted on 11/12/2001 9:49:54 AM PST by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
The irony is that they waited a full two months to release the results - hoping to have a greater impact - only to have an Airbus 300 crash turn the study into a one-morning non-story.
23 posted on 11/12/2001 9:50:34 AM PST by Wright is right!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
I called a reporter from the Chicago Tribune and then an Editor about this (the exclusion of the Military Ballots from the recount process). Its clear that the Military ballots were not included in the recount. The Editor went so far as to "admit" that this was only intended to review "the disputed ballots" in the FL election.
A damned small distinction, I think!!
24 posted on 11/12/2001 9:54:05 AM PST by Surge-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Surge-on
A damned small distinction, I think!!

A danmed important distinction!!

25 posted on 11/12/2001 9:55:45 AM PST by Surge-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Surge-on
The defining distinction I would say!
26 posted on 11/12/2001 10:12:19 AM PST by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Well, it's pretty clear that more people intended to vote for Gore than for Bush.
27 posted on 11/12/2001 10:20:25 AM PST by dely2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: dely2
Well, it's pretty clear that more people intended to vote for Gore than for Bush.

Doesn't matter. What matters are three factors:

1 - Under an earlier Florida Supreme Court decision, it is the responsibility of the voter to properly fill out his or her ballot, and

2 - Under Florida law, a full recount for a county can only proceed if, upon request for a recount, a sampling determines that there was a machine or tabulation error. Of the four counties where Gore requested a recount, only Volusia County fit that criteria, and they had their recount done within the legally-mandated time frame. There is no provision in Florida law for a statewide recount, and no provision to correct voter error, so

3 - Under United States law, guidelines and laws for elections cannot be altered after the election - something the Florida Supreme Court was clearly trying to do, as witnessed by the dissent by Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Wells in the second decision by that court:

I want to make it clear at the outset of my separate opinion that I do not question the good faith or honorable intentions of my colleagues in the majority. However, I could not more strongly disagree with their decision to reverse the trial court and prolong this judicial process. I also believe that the majority's decision cannot withstand the scrutiny which will certainly immediately follow under the United States Constitution. My succinct conclusion is that the majority's decision to return this case to the circuit court for a count of the under-votes from either Miami-Dade County or all counties has no foundation in the law of Florida as it existed on November 7, 2000, or at any time until the issuance of this opinion. The majority returns the case to the circuit court for this partial recount of under-votes on the basis of unknown or, at best, ambiguous standards with authority to obtain help from others, the credentials, qualifications, and objectivity of whom are totally unknown. That is but a first glance at the imponderable problems the majority creates.

Importantly to me, I have a deep and abiding concern that the prolonging of judicial process in this counting contest propels this country and this state into an unprecedented and unnecessary constitutional crisis. I have to conclude that there is a real and present likelihood that this constitutional crisis will do substantial damage to our country, our state, and to this Court as an institution. On the basis of my analysis of Florida law as it existed on November 7, 2000, I conclude that the trial court's decision can and should be affirmed.

So all this blather is completely irrelevant. Bush won - deal with it.

28 posted on 11/12/2001 10:59:39 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Surge-on
And taking into consideration all the cases of fraud in FL and other states, he probably won bigger than we'll ever know. I hope they investigate ALL those cases of fraud before the next election but I won't be the farm on it.
29 posted on 11/12/2001 11:15:08 AM PST by Marysecretary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
And thank God that he did!! Can you even imagine how (I wanna be)Pres. Al Gore would be coping?

Ways A President Al Gore Would Be Dealing With This War

30 posted on 11/12/2001 11:15:09 AM PST by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: stayout
We nearly fell out of our chairs when we saw the headline in this morning's Atlanta Journal-Constitution: "In last analysis of vote, Bush would have won under any recount scenario." True, it was at the bottom of the page, but it was still on page one.
31 posted on 11/12/2001 1:29:34 PM PST by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stayout
Bush wins “re-recount” – sort of

- NY Post

32 posted on 11/12/2001 1:33:46 PM PST by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dely2
Yeah, more dead people, illegals, and felons.
33 posted on 11/12/2001 2:30:15 PM PST by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | 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