7 ms·
How does this election relate to the 2000 election when all media called Gore the winner, but then in December, Bush became the president elect? https://www.fo
by sergiotapia 6y ago
How does this election relate to the 2000 election when all media called Gore the winner, but then in December, Bush became the president elect?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanponciano/2020/11/04/the-2000-election-wasnt-decided-until-december-after-a-recountheres-what-happened-to-the-stock-market/?sh=4be60bfd625b https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanponciano/2020/11/04/the...
"On election night, it was unclear who had won, with the electoral votes of the state of Florida still undecided. The returns showed that Bush had won Florida by such a close margin that state law required a recount. A month-long series of legal battles led to the highly controversial 5–4 Supreme Court decision Bush v. Gore, which ended the recount."
Can this happen again this time?
- granzymes 6y agoA few differences: * In 2000 it was one tipping-point state. Here, Biden has multiple states putting him over the top. * The margin in those states is larger than in Florida. The final official Florida count gave the victory to Bush by 537 votes. * 2000 involved a recount of legitimately questionable ballots. Trump's legal cases (thus far) have been judged by experts to be far less serious. * Trump (so far) is not challenging enough ballots to give him the lead in the tipping-point state.
- jansan 6y ago* Trump's legal cases (thus far) have been judged by experts to be far less serious* Tell us more, where are the details of that legal case?
- granzymes 6y agohttps://apnews.com/article/election-2020-donald-trump-elections-voting-fraud-and-irregularities-us-supreme-court-14eb73bc80dfd2aa637d097a3f41fca5 https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-donald-trump-electi... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/06/us/politics/trump-election-voter-fraud.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/06/us/politics/trump-electio... https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-06/supreme-court-probably-wont-decide-2020-us-presidential-election/12856390 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-06/supreme-court-probabl... https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/06/politics/lawsuits-trump-gop-proof/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/06/politics/lawsuits-trump-gop-p... https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/judges-evidence-trump-campaign-election-cases-tossed/story?id=74071460 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/judges-evidence-trump-campai...
- berniepebbles 6y agoLet’s be honest, these are activist sources who all happen to be left leaning.
- granzymes 6y agoI added a link to AP News. I don't think anyone questions the legitimacy of the AP.
- berniepebbles 6y agoIt’s not about legitimacy, it’s about misleading people about your veil of objectivity when your biases, yes even AP leans left, come out through your authors and published work.
- wernercd 6y agoAP news isn't much better... the MSM has destroyed their reputation in the march to hate Trump.
- jnetterf 6y agoFrom https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trump-campaign-is-suing-over-voting-procedures-a-look-at-the-lawsuits-11604618514 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trump-campaign-is-suing-ove... ... Barry Richard, an election lawyer who served as a lead attorney for President George W. Bush during the 2000 recount in Florida, criticized the campaign’s efforts. “I wouldn’t call it a strategy,” he said. “There isn’t any legal basis for anything I’ve seen so far.” Other election law experts have questioned the multipronged attack. Richard Hasen, professor at UC Irvine School of Law and author of “Election Meltdown,” said the lawsuits, even if partially successful, were smaller-scale and didn’t threaten the results. “If they’re not being filed to change the election outcome, what’s the point?” he said.
- mhh__ 6y agoComplete Tripe. It's a conspiracy against Donald Trump because he's a man of the people!
- malcolmgreaves 6y agoHe sued to stop counting legally cast ballots in states he was winning (PA,MI,WI) while suing other states to recount where he was loosing (AZ,GA, etc.). It's both a contradictory argument and obviously illegal: you can't stop a state's election board from counting the already cast ballots.
- guscost 6y agoWell they’re going to try to challenge lots of mail-in ballots that were either processed without poll watchers being able to see the signatures, or allegedly backdated by USPS, for a start. The first suit will be filed on Monday according to Giuliani. We’ll see how far it goes, but should be fun. This is just announced today so I’m not sure how “experts” could have weighed in already, whatever that means.
- dlp211 6y agoThey're going to get figuratively laughed out of court like have been so far. The handful of cases they have won are so non-controversial, they could have been equally brought by the Biden campaign, eg: observer distance in PA. These aren't serious people. They never have been, they never will be.
- guscost 6y agoOk, that’s one prediction. > These aren’t serious people. They never have been, they never will be. Well, Giuliani prosecuted the NY mafia and won, so part of this statement is a little far fetched.
- dlp211 6y agoYes, at one time Giuliani did good things. That was over 25 years ago. Giuliani is nothing more than a muckraker for Trump nowadays. And yes that is a prediction. But it is an informed prediction. It is informed by the fact that so far, every case has been tossed for lack of evidence. I can go around making false assertions and filing false lawsuits all day too, it doesn't mean that anyone should take them seriously, and no one would. The only reason that we give these assertions oxygen is out of deference to the power these people hold.
- dlp211 6y agoFollow Up: The NY Post editorial board, one of the few boards that endorsed Trump has offered the following advice: "Get Rudy Giuliani off TV." Even the Post doesn't give Giuliani credence. Trump will get recounts, none of them will move the numbers in a meaningful way, just like every other recount in the history of Presidential recounts.
- allenu 6y ago2000 also had the "hanging chads" issue and confusing ballots that potentially caused people to choose a different candidate from what they wanted.
- wernercd 6y ago2020 has ballots after the election day... Hanging chads were at least GUARENTEED to be cast before election. The race to change laws in various states at the last minute has guaranteed a faught and without hesitation leaves open the charge of fraud. There is zero reason why America shouldn't have VoterID free to all and sanity checks at the voter booth to guarentee 150+ year olds don't vote. https://www.indiarightnownews.com/seven-voters-older-than-the-oldest-human-being-alive-today-voted-in-michigan-including-one-man-born-in-1850/ https://www.indiarightnownews.com/seven-voters-older-than-th... The charges of fraud are only going to worse the longer those in power don't take real steps to fix the issues.
- joshuamorton 6y agoThere are no ballots cast after election day. There are some received after election day, but none in PA, where those ballots aren't included in any counts.
- maerF0x0 6y agoCan you help me understand how we'd know if a ballot were cast after election day, if received after election day? I understand postmark is one such form of "signature of authenticity" (in a sense). Are there others at play?
- joshuamorton 6y agoThere are (generally) three ways to vote. In person, absentee via some form of ballot drop off, and absentee by mail. In person and absentee ballots dropped off can be trivially found to be legitimate (timewise). You have them by 8PM or you don't. For mail-in ballots, states have different rules. Some states allow ballots received by the 12th or later, as long as the postmark is on or before election day. Some states require ballots to be received by election day. PA is under a microscope because ballots postmarked by the 3rd, but received by the 6th may or may not be counted, pending court decisions. Those ballots, however, are not included in current vote totals as reported by the state, so Biden won PA without those votes (and beyond the margin required for a recount). They'd just further extend his lead.
- jansan 6y agoYes, at least in theory. The simple reason is that in the end not the media, but the courts will decide.
- sergiotapia 6y agoI think this is all anyone is really asking for.
- maxerickson 6y agoAs yet, no court is adjudicating an issue that impacts a large number of ballots. State election systems will decide the election.
- unethical_ban 6y agoMost are asking for the people to decide. And if the people truly and directly got to decide the president, this post would have been made on Wednesday morning.
- sergiotapia 6y agoThat's not realistic because the fate of the country would be decided by a handful of cities, all sharing a same culture.
- crowbahr 6y agoHaving lived in 3 different cities let me tell you: they ain't got anything close to the same culture. Seattle, NY, and Atlanta are as disparate physically as culturally. And the majority of Americans don't want a rural minority dictating the "fate of the country" either.
- spankalee 6y agoCourts do not typically decide elections.
- 6y ago
- jkinudsjknds 6y agoNo. Biden is likely to win across multiple states by a large margin, notably in PA where he is above the point that would require a recount.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- anonAndOn 6y agoNo. For the many reasons others have noted and the elimination of the "hanging chad". [0] [0]https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/666812854/the-florida-recount-of-2000-a-nightmare-that-goes-on-haunting https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/666812854/the-florida-recount...
- tptacek 6y agoThe big difference is that 2000 revolved around a disputed recount, in a race with a margin of fewer than 1000 votes. There will be recounts in this race, but: (1) There's no reason to believe they'll change the outcome much (recounts in 2016 didn't) --- states have learned since 2000 and have moved away from faulty ballot designs. (2) The recounts will be occurring in multiple states, and Trump needs to sweep them. (3) The margins in those recounts are much bigger than in 2000 --- tens of thousands of votes, not hundreds.
- MisterBastahrd 6y agoLook at it logically. Bush was ahead by 537 votes. The court wrangling happened for so long and there were so many delays that it was impossible to do a recount in time for the legally mandated date of certification. Biden is ahead here. Even if you remove PA or AZ, he'd still have enough electoral votes to win. He's going to be President. The only person who doesn't get that at this point is Trump, and everyone around him is just bowing to his whims.
- perennate 6y agoWhat do you mean "all media called Gore the winner"? I can't find any evidence of that. According to Wikipedia [1], "on November 8 ... the networks declared that Bush had carried Florida and therefore been elected president. ... after all votes were counted, ... the networks retracted their declarations that Bush had won Florida and the presidency". Also, note that Gore privately conceded the election that night, but retracted it after further counting due to the <1000 vote margin. So in fact major networks (including CNN, ABC, FOX) initially called Bush the winner, but retracted that afterwards due to the possibility of a recount. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidentia...
- adrr 6y agoAmount of misinformation coming out is really concerning. SharpieGate, fake videos of ballot stuffing, more votes than registered voters etc.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- vptr 6y agoHere https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20001108/aponline183922_000.htm https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20001108/apon...
- edaemon 6y ago
- MrBuddyCasino 6y agoThe media also called Tilden over Hayes in 1876 and Dewey over Truman in the 1940s. Its almost as if they're not the ones to decide the winner of an election.
- jungletime 6y agoYes, I think so. Fact is that mail in voting has been banned in European countries and elections overturned because its much easier to cheat. I would need more some statistical evidence. So far I have seen graphs pointing out how Biden's tally doesn't follow Benford’s Law. https://principia-scientific.com/joe-bidens-votes-violate-benfords-law-mathematics/ https://principia-scientific.com/joe-bidens-votes-violate-be... "Michigan County Clerk Admits Voting Software Glitch "Skewed" Results, Trump To Gain 6,000 Votes https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/michigan-county-clerk-admits-voting-software-glitch-skewed-results-trump-gain-6000-votes https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/michigan-county-clerk-adm... This is going to go in front of the Supreme Court. Twitter should not be trying to hide the fact that one of the parties claims fraud. A huge number of people voted for Trump. Let him make his case. My Gut instinct is that it is suspicious that some democratic counties got 90% turnout.
- liquidgecka 6y agoIt's more nuanced than that. Gore wanted some select counties recounted, bush wanted no counties recounted, but if there was going to be a rexound then bush wanted the whole state recounted. In the end the SCbrules that the 14th amendment said that including votes with "hanging Chad's" and other clear intent required the whole state to be recounted. Gore conceeded because there wasn't enough time and he believed that a whole state recount wouldn't have favored him in the end. History reflects that it may have been a bad strategy for Gore to try and recount just some counties because he may well have won if he argued for a state wide recount from the beginning.
- jcranmer 6y agoThe biggest factor in Florida is that the ballot marking system that Florida used at that time was extremely prone to failure, especially with regards to machine reading of ballots (which itself could cause an apparent mark on the ballot!). This means that trying to divine whether or not a ballot recorded an intent to vote for a candidate can be subjective and depends on the exact standard you want to use, which Florida didn't specify (and the Florida Supreme Court ruled was ultimately too vague). Since 2000, most states have switched to optical scan ballots as their paper records. These ballots have much lower error rates, closer to 1 error per million votes. I don't think there's been a single race using optical scan ballots where a recount actually caused a winner to switch.
- dlp211 6y agoAnother thing that complicated this was that the way you punched the ballot resulted in the chad going into a waste bin. Those waste bins would fill up to the point where it would physically prevent you from being able to punch out your chad. That election and SCOTUS ruling was a mess, and as a consequence did a lot of damage to this countries institutions.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- baby 6y agoThe sad part is that the popular vote has a much cleaner margin, and going forward this is what medias should report if people want change.
- mkolodny 6y agoThe Associated Press, who called the election this year, and who has been calling US elections since 1848, didn't call the election for either side in 2000: "AP did not call the closely contested race in 2000 between George W. Bush and Al Gore – we stood behind our assessment that the margin in Florida made it too close to call." https://www.ap.org/en-us/topics/politics/elections/how-we-call-races https://www.ap.org/en-us/topics/politics/elections/how-we-ca...