Do you think we ever will?
As it stands today, Gore is 300K+ in the popular vote. Not a stellar amount, but enough to lead me to believe that it will stand. And that Bush will have an * next to his name in history, just as I believe Benjamin Harris did, for winning in the same fashion.
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,562
- 9
- 81
DaBoneHead
There are hundreds of thousands of uncounted absentee ballots that weren't counted in California because Bush couldn't win that state. Other states that Bush won by a large margin may not have counted all votes. If we did a hand recount of every district in the country, it's entirely possible that Bush would have the popular vote as well. Saying that Gore won the popular vote because he's ahead by a handful (relatively) of votes is ludicrous.
There are hundreds of thousands of uncounted absentee ballots that weren't counted in California because Bush couldn't win that state. Other states that Bush won by a large margin may not have counted all votes. If we did a hand recount of every district in the country, it's entirely possible that Bush would have the popular vote as well. Saying that Gore won the popular vote because he's ahead by a handful (relatively) of votes is ludicrous.
DaBoneHead:
Would you honestly be saying the same thing about the electoral vs. popular vote if Gore had won on the electoral and bush had the popular?
Would you honestly be saying the same thing about the electoral vs. popular vote if Gore had won on the electoral and bush had the popular?
Bober,
That is all speculation. I try to deal with facts. You imply that california threw out hundreds of thousands of absentee ballots because Bush couldn't win... are you sure they all voted for Bush? I don't think so...
But why speak up anyways Bober? I thought you voted for Browne... or did you?
I've resigned myself to the fact that a person I detest will be King. Actually, Gore or Bush I would detest, but Bush moreso for reasons I have listed elsewhere...
What I'm getting tired if is all the personal attacks, and usually from the usual group of people.
<< And I thought this was yesterday's thread >>
Ride525,
Yesterday was the 3rd. Today is the 4th.
It was posted here.
As I pointed out in that thread, there's plenty of opinion in the opposite direction:
Fact check: Statisticians dispute Gore's math on Miami-Dade hand counts.
Russ, NCNE
Why should there be a "dark cloud" over someone's presidency if some states go to a proportionate electoral college system--guess what that would do to big states like California and New York--you guessed it, Bush would have received some of those votes instead of Bore getting all of them. It all depends on HOW they allocate.
By the way, you conveniently forget about all the Floridians who went home while polls were still open once the state was called for Gore.
Either way, this election was a failure, in PROCESS only. Perhaps we'll get some standards out of this.
By the way, you conveniently forget about all the Floridians who went home while polls were still open once the state was called for Gore.
Either way, this election was a failure, in PROCESS only. Perhaps we'll get some standards out of this.
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,562
- 9
- 81
DaBoneHead
I'm merely pointing out that there are no certainties in this election. I did vote for Browne, but it'll come as no shock to anyone here that I'm a right-leaning libertarian. I detest the Democrat platform, and until there's a viable libertarian candidate I'll fight the liberal agenda with the Republicans.
And if you read a little bit you'll see that insults are hurled equally by both sides.
I'm merely pointing out that there are no certainties in this election. I did vote for Browne, but it'll come as no shock to anyone here that I'm a right-leaning libertarian. I detest the Democrat platform, and until there's a viable libertarian candidate I'll fight the liberal agenda with the Republicans.
And if you read a little bit you'll see that insults are hurled equally by both sides.
<< Yesterday was the 3rd. Today is the 4th. >>
Thanks so much for pointing that out, but it was obvious to me that there were two threads going from your (and my) earlier posts.
<< As I pointed out in that thread, there's plenty of opinion in the opposite direction >>
I think this thread that you pointed out is a very valid statistical representation of the Miami-Dade vote. From my limited reading of the analysis, I'd agree that you couldn't take the 1/5 and extrapolate it out to the whole county.
However, I don't think it discredits the article that is the topic of this thread at all. I don't see that the artice that is the topic of this thread did the same (incorrect in my mind) assumption that one could take 1/5 of the votes in Miami-Dade and forecast the other 4/5. I see your article as a separate (but valid) issue.
Fdisk,
Through controversy comes change. If states start switching to a proportional electoral vote system, IMO it will be an acknowledgement that the old system was broke, and needed fixed. Also, depending on the states that switch, it may even mean that Gore would have won.
Myself, I am resigned to what will happen, and I suggest everyone do the same. We can argue all we want, but it won't change squat. Whether or not we have a president right now is irrelevant to AT-OT because we can't change anything anymore. Voting is done. Find new topics.
And for you people who refer to Gore supporters as "Gorons" and "Sore/Loserman", grow up. That is just bandwaggoning. So many of you are programmed to repeat whatever the party says that when you say something like that, it has no meaning, and makes you look like Republican Party Lapdog simpletons.
Whoever wins, the country will have to go through a period of reconciliation. It is important that you don't throw salt in open wounds, rather than trying to rub someones nose in it, especially with all the caveats of this election. No one has the right to gloat about this election. There was no clear winner.
Through controversy comes change. If states start switching to a proportional electoral vote system, IMO it will be an acknowledgement that the old system was broke, and needed fixed. Also, depending on the states that switch, it may even mean that Gore would have won.
Myself, I am resigned to what will happen, and I suggest everyone do the same. We can argue all we want, but it won't change squat. Whether or not we have a president right now is irrelevant to AT-OT because we can't change anything anymore. Voting is done. Find new topics.
And for you people who refer to Gore supporters as "Gorons" and "Sore/Loserman", grow up. That is just bandwaggoning. So many of you are programmed to repeat whatever the party says that when you say something like that, it has no meaning, and makes you look like Republican Party Lapdog simpletons.
Whoever wins, the country will have to go through a period of reconciliation. It is important that you don't throw salt in open wounds, rather than trying to rub someones nose in it, especially with all the caveats of this election. No one has the right to gloat about this election. There was no clear winner.
Sheesh.... for the millionth time, whether one candidate got the popular vote (which is even in question because of uncounted absentee ballots in many states) is completely irrelevant. The constitution calls for a candidate winning the electoral election, not the popular one. Don't like it? Change the constitution.... but until then, Bush winning the election is not "stealing" anything -- he won it under the proper rules of the constitution. There is no 'dark cloud' above his win, there is no "*" next to his name. He did not win it with felons voting for him, cronies manufacturing votes during a subjective handcount, dimples, hanging chads and other such crap. He won it with an unbiased machine count. He won it in a second machine count. He won it after the biased hand count. What more can the guy possibly do??
Bush won by the rules in place for this election. We've discovered flaws in the way votes are cast and tabulated and some vagueness in FL law (which I'm sure is present in other states, too). That's a good thing, folks. Now we can improve the system so counting is more accurate in the future and laws are more clear. All parties involved realize this is a goal worth acheiving. But, again, Bush/Cheney won given the rule-set in place on Nov. 7th. All the scum-sucking attornies in the world can't change that fact.
DaBoneHead:
<< Yes, I most certainly would. As would you. >>
No, I wouldn't - I really think the popular vote is moot (unless the election system changes). And I'm not Republican, BTW - I'm just really not impressed with the way this election is being dragged through the mud like a disputed call in a football game.
<< Yes, I most certainly would. As would you. >>
No, I wouldn't - I really think the popular vote is moot (unless the election system changes). And I'm not Republican, BTW - I'm just really not impressed with the way this election is being dragged through the mud like a disputed call in a football game.
Popular vote discussion;
Have you heard anyone argue that their football team should have won because because their team got the most "Total Yards" or the most "1st Downs". Doesn't mean any thing does it.
Let's face it, the candidates would have campaigned differently and spend their advertizing dollars differently if the popular vote meant something.
Also, voters who were convinced that their presidental vote meant "nothing" in the 35 states that weren't close might, have some reason to overcome their apathy and actually vote.
Have you heard anyone argue that their football team should have won because because their team got the most "Total Yards" or the most "1st Downs". Doesn't mean any thing does it.
Let's face it, the candidates would have campaigned differently and spend their advertizing dollars differently if the popular vote meant something.
Also, voters who were convinced that their presidental vote meant "nothing" in the 35 states that weren't close might, have some reason to overcome their apathy and actually vote.
Nick,
Believe me I understand that. However, this incident of popular vote vs electoral vote has only happened twice in the past, and the last time was 1888.
What I see coming out of this is a reform effort on the electoral system (and definitely getting rid of punchcard ballots... anyone want to take bets with me on this one?)
Your reference to the football game is pertinent, however, if you correlate popular vote to points on the board, then the analogy can go either way.
I didn't vote for Gore or Bush. But I have reconciled myself with Bush simply because it appears he is putting together a good cabinet. He will need it.
However, that doesn't change the fact that regardless of how you count the votes... Gore will come up with the popular, and Bush the electoral. It is interesting, and history will record an * next to his name. Just as Jackson and Clinton have ones by their name for being impeached, and Nixon for resigning amid scandal, George W Bush will have one along with Benjamin Harris and "that other guy" for not winning the popular vote.
It has been 112 years since this has happened... and unfortunately long enough to make people actually think that it wouldn't happen again. I think people will pay closer attention to election matters in the future, and perhaps that is the only silver lining to the 2000 election cloud.
Believe me I understand that. However, this incident of popular vote vs electoral vote has only happened twice in the past, and the last time was 1888.
What I see coming out of this is a reform effort on the electoral system (and definitely getting rid of punchcard ballots... anyone want to take bets with me on this one?)
Your reference to the football game is pertinent, however, if you correlate popular vote to points on the board, then the analogy can go either way.
I didn't vote for Gore or Bush. But I have reconciled myself with Bush simply because it appears he is putting together a good cabinet. He will need it.
However, that doesn't change the fact that regardless of how you count the votes... Gore will come up with the popular, and Bush the electoral. It is interesting, and history will record an * next to his name. Just as Jackson and Clinton have ones by their name for being impeached, and Nixon for resigning amid scandal, George W Bush will have one along with Benjamin Harris and "that other guy" for not winning the popular vote.
It has been 112 years since this has happened... and unfortunately long enough to make people actually think that it wouldn't happen again. I think people will pay closer attention to election matters in the future, and perhaps that is the only silver lining to the 2000 election cloud.
The Miami Herald may be the worst paper in the country. It is certainly worse than the Chicago Tribune, which is the worst I've read regularly. So, I'd give NO credence to the story based upon its historical accuracy.
Having said that, I would bet Gore would have won Florida by 200,000 votes, easily if all the votes had been counted. In Jacksonville alone, thousands of black votes were not counted. In Miami-Dade County thousands of votes not counted. In Palm Beach County, ditto. We have about 30 other counties with punch card machines here in Florida and probably all of them would give an edge to Gore. 200,000 easy.
Having said that, I would bet Gore would have won Florida by 200,000 votes, easily if all the votes had been counted. In Jacksonville alone, thousands of black votes were not counted. In Miami-Dade County thousands of votes not counted. In Palm Beach County, ditto. We have about 30 other counties with punch card machines here in Florida and probably all of them would give an edge to Gore. 200,000 easy.
The electoral college WORKS! If it wasn't for it, the madness going on in Flordia would be going on in every state.
Bryan
Bryan
The central issue is our shoddy ability to accurately count votes. If precision could be increased to say 99.99%, the electoral college would always reflect the popular vote (if you assume EC votes are always cast in good faith for whoever wins the popular vote in each state).
So, if you want to keep the EC system you ought to increase voting accuracy. If you want to drop the EC system and go with the popular vote, again you need to increase accuracy. Oh and fix those damn non-specific laws too (I assume they ain't just a problem in FL).
So, if you want to keep the EC system you ought to increase voting accuracy. If you want to drop the EC system and go with the popular vote, again you need to increase accuracy. Oh and fix those damn non-specific laws too (I assume they ain't just a problem in FL).
<< The central issue is our shoddy ability to accurately count votes. If precision could be increased to say 99.99%, the electoral college would always reflect the popular vote (if you assume EC votes are always cast in good faith for whoever wins the popular vote in each state). >>
Actually not necessarily true.....It's possible for CANDIDATE 1 to BARELY win the popular vote in just a few (the twelve biggest would do it) highly populated states (lets say by one vote) and win the Electoral College. If the other states each were heavily for the other CANDIDATE 2, (lets say each by 100,000 votes), then CANDIDATE 2 would have 3.8 milloion more votes than CANDIDATE 1, but would lose the election, since CANDIDATE 1 got 280 electoral votes from the 12 largest states.
chess<<In Jacksonville alone, thousands of black votes were not counted. In Miami-Dade County thousands of votes not counted. In Palm Beach County, ditto. We have about 30 other counties with punch card machines here in Florida and probably all of them would give an edge to Gore. 200,000 easy. >>
Are you smoking some tea??
Do you have ANYTHING to substantiate this nonsense about 'thousands' of votes not being counted? Don't you think if there was such a thing, Bore voters would be all over it?? Of course they would. It's a bunch of baloney. Across the state, and the nation, a certain percentage of ballots is rejected for one reason or another. Even if you take the highest reject percentage of any precinct in Florida, and use that same percentage on all the counties, you would still not even be close to 200,000. The you have to add in to the mix that some of the precincts were for Bush, so he would have gained votes there. Take it all into account, and the vote was extremely close. No 200,000 for Gore, not for Bush either. Bottom line, it's very close, but Bush won. Deal with it.
Are you smoking some tea??
Do you have ANYTHING to substantiate this nonsense about 'thousands' of votes not being counted? Don't you think if there was such a thing, Bore voters would be all over it?? Of course they would. It's a bunch of baloney. Across the state, and the nation, a certain percentage of ballots is rejected for one reason or another. Even if you take the highest reject percentage of any precinct in Florida, and use that same percentage on all the counties, you would still not even be close to 200,000. The you have to add in to the mix that some of the precincts were for Bush, so he would have gained votes there. Take it all into account, and the vote was extremely close. No 200,000 for Gore, not for Bush either. Bottom line, it's very close, but Bush won. Deal with it.TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter