U.S. presidential election, 2000

The U.S. presidential election of 2000 was one of the closest elections in U.S. history, decided by only 527 votes in the swing state of Florida. On election night, the media prematurely declared a winner twice based on exit polls before finally conceding that the Florida race was too close to call. It would turn out to be a month before the election was finally certified after numerous court challenges and recounts. Republican candidate George W. Bush won Florida's 25 electoral votes by a razor-thin margin of the popular vote there, and thereby defeated Democratic candidate Al Gore.

Media post-electoral studies/recounts

After the election, USA Today, the Miami Herald, and Knight Ridder commissioned accounting firm BDO Seidman to count undervotes, that is, ballots which did not register any vote when counted by machine. BDO Seidman's results, reported in USA Today http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2001-04-03-floridamain.htm, show that under the strictest standard, where only a cleanly punched ballot with a fully removed chad was counted, Gore won by three votes. Under all other standards, Bush won, with Bush's margin increasing as looser standards were used. The standards considered by BDO Seidman were:

Related Topics:
USA Today - Miami Herald - Knight Ridder - BDO Seidman

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Lenient standard. Any alteration in a chad, ranging from a dimple to a full punch, counts as a vote. By this standard, Bush won by 1,665 votes.
• Palm Beach standard. A dimple is counted as a vote if other races on the same ballot show dimples as well. By this standard, Bush won by 884 votes.
• Two-corner standard. A chad with two or more corners removed is counted as a vote. This is the most common standard in use. By this standard, Bush won by 363 votes.
• Strict standard. Only a fully removed chad counts as a vote. By this standard, Gore won by 3 votes.

The study remarks that because of the possibility of mistakes, it is difficult to conclude that Gore was surely the winner under the strict standard. It also remarks that there are variations between examiners, and that election officials often did not provide the same number of undervotes as were counted on Election Day. Furthermore, the study did not consider overvotes, ballots which registered more than one vote when counted by machine.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The study also found that undervotes break down into two distinct types, those coming from punch-card using counties, and those coming from optical-scan using counties. Undervotes from punch-card using counties give new votes to candidates in roughly the same proportion as the county's official vote. Furthermore, the number of undervotes correlates with how well the punch-card machines are maintained, and not with factors such as race or socioeconomic status. Undervotes from optical-scan using counties, however, correlate with Democratic votes more than Republican votes. Optical-scan counties were the only places in the study where Gore gained more votes than Bush, 1,036 to 775.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A larger consortium of news organizations, including the USA Today, the Miami Herald, Knight Ridder, the Tampa Tribune, and five other newspapers next conducted a full recount of all ballots, including both undervotes and overvotes. According to their results, under stricter standards for vote counting, Bush won, and under looser standards, Gore won. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2001-05-10-recountmain.htm However, a Gore win was impossible without a recount of overvotes, which he did not request.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

According to the study, only 3% of the 111,261 overvotes had markings that could be interpreted as a legal vote. According to Anthony Salvado, a political scientist at the University of California, Irvine, who acted as a consultant on the media recount, most of the errors were caused by ballot design, ballot wording, and efforts by voters to choose both a president and a vice-president. For example, 21,188 of the Florida overvotes, or nearly one-fifth of the total, originated from Duval County, where the presidential race was split across two pages. Voters were instructed to "vote every page". Half of the overvotes in Duval County had one presidential candidate marked on each page, making their vote illegal under Florida law. Salvado says that this error alone cost Gore the election.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Including overvotes in the above totals for undervotes gives different margins of victory:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Lenient standard. Gore by 332 votes.
• Palm Beach standard. Gore by 242 votes.
• Two-corner standard. Bush by 407 votes.
• Strict standard. Bush by 152 votes.

Democrats also blamed third party candidate Ralph Nader for taking the election away from Gore. Some say had Nader not run, Gore would have won both New Hampshire and Florida and won the election with 296 electoral votes. (He only needed one of the two to win) However, it is worth noting that approximately 8 million Democrats voted for Bush.

Related Topics:
Ralph Nader - New Hampshire - Florida

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In 2003, US citizens living in the state of Florida were asked who they voted for in the 2000 Election as part of the Statistical Abstract Census. The results showed President Bush receiving more than 1000 votes more than former Vice President Gore.

Related Topics:
2003 - Florida - Statistical Abstract Census

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

However this result was badly tarnished when it was discovered that the man responsible for this census had links to the original Bush campaign in 2000.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~