-Caveat Lector-

Tally no!  - Keep counting votes in Florida

<http://www.msnbc.com/news/536050.asp>

Miami Herald's recount results were sloppy, incomplete

By Eric Alterman
MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR
Feb. 26, 2001

The results are in. The hysterical anger and political maneuvering that
prevented a final tally of the votes in Florida's presidential race was for
naught. According to a recount of Miami-Dade County, led by the Miami
Herald, a hand recount would have given Gore only another 49 votes there.
EVEN WHEN added to the Gore vote tallies in Volusia, Palm Beach and Broward
counties, Bush still comes out ahead by 140 votes. You would think this
figure would finally end the 2000 election controversy. You would be wrong.
The Herald and its parent company, Knight Ridder, retained a public
accounting firm, BDO Seidman, LLP, to conduct the review. Spending more
than 80 hours during a three-week period, the reporters and accountants
examined every "undervote" separately and recorded their findings.
Of course, each time the votes were counted they changed ever so slightly.
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is never so true as in the necessarily
subjective case of vote counting. Hanging chads fall off, pregnant chads
give birth, writing becomes smudged, etc.
                           UGLY LESSONS
Unfortunately, the Herald recount proves only one thing: Al Gore and his
campaign pursued a remarkably foolish and self-defeating post-election
strategy. In picking only five counties in which to ask for a recount, the
Gore campaign made two fatal mistakes. First, they gave the impression that
they were hoping to cherry-pick the result by asking for recounts only in
those counties where they had the most to gain. This played into Republican
accusations that Gore was no more interested in a fair vote count than was
Florida Secretary of State and Republican insider Katherine Harris; rather,
Gore was arguably trying to lawyer himself into the presidency by hook and
by crook.
Second and most damning, this strategy was not only counter-productive from
a public relations standpoint; it was destined to lose. Had Gore won with a
five-county undercount-only strategy, this victory would likely have been
overturned by the Florida legislature, or if necessary, the U.S. House of
Representatives. And as we saw in the end, the Supreme Court was also
willing to place its own credibility on the line in the end if there were
no other way to overturn a questionable Gore victory.
The only way for Gore to address all of these potential
pitfalls would have been to undertake the strategy suggested in this space
when the battle was still raging: to call for a full hand recount in
Florida. A call for a complete recount would have provided a masterstroke
of favorable publicity for the Gore team. What's more, according to the
evidence available so far, it would have worked.
When the Supreme Court made its final election ruling last December, one
argument it gave for overturning the Florida high court's pro-Gore decision
was the Florida court's refusal (at the Gore's team's request) to consider
the 110,000 "overvotes," where a machine count recorded more than one vote
for president. When examined by hand, however, many of these votes turned
out to be legal, as both the punch card (or check mark) matched the name of
the candidate written in.
In late December, the Orlando Sentinel took a look at
about 3,000 overvotes in Lake County. The paper found more than 600 valid
ballots that had been ignored by the machines, with Gore picking up 130
even in this heavily pro-Bush county. In late January the Chicago Tribune
reported that in 15 Florida counties with a particularly high rate of
overvotes, more than 1,700 votes that showed a clear choice had been
discarded. Most of the counties in the Tribune's study were small, rural
and predominantly Republican. Yet even so Gore's net gain was 366
votes.  And a Washington Post review of the computer records of 2.7 million
votes in eight of Florida's largest counties reported that overvotes
trended toward Gore at a rate of three to one.
                           EXPENSIVE WASTE OF TIME
Add these together, even with the new undervote count, and Bush is back
cutting brush in Crawford, Texas, while Al Gore is your new president. But
because it chose to ignore these legal votes in its own recount, the
Herald/Knight Ridder effort is an expensive waste of time, useless for
everyone but Bush/Republican propagandists. It will be a test of the media
to treat these results with the critical scrutiny they deserve. (One paper
which has already failed this test is USA TODAY, which ran the Herald
results under the misleading headline, "Recount Study: Gore Still Loses,"
thoughtlessly accepting the Herald's flawed counting standards.)
We will not have a genuine answer to these recount questions until the
consortium of eight newspapers that has contracted for a much fuller
investigation than the Herald's finally completes its report. This might be
months away. Having shot itself in their collective feet over and over
during this election, it might behoove media mavens to keep their mouths
shut and their powder dry until we have a better understanding of what the
Florida vote-undervotes and overvotes, really tells us.
I'm not holding my breath.
----
Eric Alterman is a columnist for The Nation and a regular contributor to MSNBC.

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to