# Did Sandra Day O'Connor ruin her legacy with Bush vs Gore? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 25, 2010, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878 "2010-11-25T15:25:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![godix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/278dde/32.png) [@godix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/godix)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/21 "2010-11-26T03:56:17Z")
You know the most interesting thing about those counts that showed Gore would have won under Bush’s standard and Bush would have won under Gore’s standards? The recounting wasn’t done until several months after Bush was sworn in. Just something to think about for those who consider a deadline on vote counting to be a bad thing. As for the rest, any person who argues ‘votes that will probably favor one candidate should be recounted, but all the others shouldn’t be’ deserves a kick in the nuts. That’s just blatant partisan hackery no matter how you look at it. Any judge who delivers that well justified emasculation should have, if anything, their legacy improved by it. That being said, the real tarnished legacy of it was all the American system. The fact that the Al Frankin thing and the current Alaska mess happened well afterward just shows America hasn’t learned the lesson yet. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/22 "2010-11-26T04:04:29Z")
Ahem. Wouldn’t O’Connor’s true legacy be the first woman on the Supreme Court? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/23 "2010-11-26T04:49:14Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Oddly enough, so what? You’re falling into the same partisan trap that O’Connor did, considering that it was only about winning and not about democracy. The basic principle of democracy is that elections are decided by votes, and that the counting be done, according to Florida law for example, according to the “clear intent of the voter”. She and several other Justices put their partisan interests above that principle, and showed they knew it by trying to prevent their ruling being used as a precedent. Gore tried to cherry pick a couple of counties and the Supreme Court said no. It’s as simple as that. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/24 "2010-11-26T05:14:26Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So to be clear, do you disagree with both the finding of EP violation and the remedy proposed, or just the remedy? I generally agree with this analysis of the case: > **[Bleu de Chanal 100ml Perfume - The Freshest Fragrance](https://openzpf.com/bleudechanal/Bush_v_Gore.htm)** > > Top Notes: Lemon, Grapefruit, Mint, Pink Pepper ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 8:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/25 "2010-11-26T08:46:13Z")
The question of whether Gore beat Bush by a 50.01 to 49.99 margin or vice versa never seemed particularly interesting to me. (I do understand it might have been extremely important!) What really bothered me was that the 9 Justices of SCOTUS voted exactly according to their appointing party. Does _anyone_ sincerely believe that the 9 Justices all voted according to their conscience and interpretation of law, and the political line-up was coincidence? Also bothersome is the idea that FoxNews’ premature victory announcement fostered a preconception which carried over to the recounting; i.e. that Gore was a loser trying to overturn Bush’s legitimate victory. Did FoxNews’ premature announcement indeed have that effect? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 9:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/26 "2010-11-26T09:26:23Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > The question of whether Gore beat Bush by a 50.01 to 49.99 margin or vice versa never seemed particularly interesting to me. (I do understand it might have been extremely important!) > > What really bothered me was that the 9 Justices of SCOTUS voted exactly according to their appointing party. Does _anyone_ sincerely believe that the 9 Justices all voted according to their conscience and interpretation of law, and the political line-up was coincidence? Then is it possible that SCOTUS got it right and the 4 dissenters were the ones being partisan trying to give Gore the election? I mean 2 of them did say that a (Democrat-heavy) county counting a ballot that was breathed on as a Gore vote was ok even if another county didn’t have the same standard. Again, I ask anyone who thinks SCOTUS got it right what a proper ruling should be considering that Presidential elections follow different rules than every other election in the US and following Fla law, Fla Constitution and the US Constitution. To paraphase another doper (I think Bricker), just because you disagree with the decision doesn’t mean it was wrong. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/27 "2010-11-26T12:20:05Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Also bothersome is the idea that FoxNews’ premature victory announcement fostered a preconception which carried over to the recounting; i.e. that Gore was a loser trying to overturn Bush’s legitimate victory. Did FoxNews’ premature announcement indeed have that effect? Huh? All the networks originally called it for Gore, then they switched it to Bush early the next day, then they switched it back to undecided a little bit later. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/28 "2010-11-26T13:31:42Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Then is it possible that SCOTUS got it right and the 4 dissenters were the ones being partisan trying to give Gore the election? 😕 😕 Either you’re responding to someone else, or you’ve misread my post. I offered no opinion on whether the 5 got it wrong, the 4 got it wrong, or some combination thereof. I merely asked whether other Dopers view the political alignment as coincidental. 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/29 "2010-11-26T13:47:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So to be clear, do you disagree with both the finding of EP violation and the remedy proposed, or just the remedy? > [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > I generally agree with this analysis of the case: > > [Bleu de Chanal 100ml Perfume - The Freshest Fragrance](http://www.humanismbyjoe.com/Bush_v_Gore.htm) Interestingly, that analysis completely fails to mention – one might even say “conceals” – the fact that it was not five, but seven Supreme Court justices that decided Florida’s decision was violative of Equal Protection. I’m quite confident that the reason they gloss that over is it would destroy the narrative that “five conservative thieves stole the election.” But since you generally agree with that analysis, and since that analysis fails to answer the question I asked, I’ll ask you again: do you disagree with both the finding of EP violation and the remedy proposed, or just the remedy? ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/30 "2010-11-26T13:49:50Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Huh? All the networks originally called it for Gore, then they switched it to Bush early the next day, then they switched it back to undecided a little bit later. It’s not clear whether you disagree that Fox News was first to call Bush winner (it was), or whether such media pronouncements influenced the public perception on post-election manoeuvres (perhaps debatable). When Fox called it, other networks may have followed in “self-defense.” I wonder if you would agree that America’s failure to simply _count those votes_ in a straightforward fashion made a travesty of American democracy, regardless of which party benefited. (Perhaps one of [these](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2000) [links](http://www.angelfire.com/journal2/davismi/bushtheft.html) would be of interest.) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/31 "2010-11-26T13:53:06Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Also bothersome is the idea that FoxNews’ premature victory announcement fostered a preconception which carried over to the recounting; i.e. that Gore was a loser trying to overturn Bush’s legitimate victory. Did FoxNews’ premature announcement indeed have that effect? That’s not what happened. Fox – and every other network – first called the election in Florida for Gore. So I assume you’d now like to explore how much of an effect that had in helping Gore? Or is your view that it’s of interest only if it goes the other way? > [@septimus](#): > > What really bothered me was that the 9 Justices of SCOTUS voted exactly according to their appointing party. Does _anyone_ sincerely believe that the 9 Justices all voted according to their conscience and interpretation of law, and the political line-up was coincidence? It’s quite plausible. As a general principle, “conservative” judges tend to strict letter-of-the-law types, and liberals judges more “living, breathing law” types. This decision, distilled down to the essence of “what does the printed law say about deadlines?” fits perfectly into those pigeonholes. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/32 "2010-11-26T14:48:53Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > The 4 FL judges who did everything to help Gore win, the 4 dissenting judges on SCOTUS who all of a sudden believed in states’ right You too are in the trap of thinking it’s only a partisan-advantage issue, not statecraft. Tell us, what do you think they should have done if they were interested only in having the true winner determined? If they had been following actual Constitutional and democratic principle instead, _as they should have_? > [@jtgain](#): > > IIRC, Gore only wanted the undervotes counted in the four Dem counties. Bush wanted a full statewide recount thinking that the undervotes in strong GOP counties would balance out. After all this time, the facts should be known. Bush wanted no recount at all. Gore initially wanted only “undervotes” (a euphemism for votes not counted at all) to be counted, but changed his position to wanting a full count (not “recount”) of the whole state. That is what the Florida Supreme Court, the competent authority in ruling on Florida election laws, was heading toward when a panicky, partisan contingent on SCOTUS decided there was too much risk of their man losing, and issued the injunction. > [@Guinastasia](#): > > Ahem. > Wouldn’t O’Connor’s true legacy be the first woman on the Supreme Court? Wouldn’t that be a sexist, even condescending, view to take, rather than considering her legacy to be what she actually did with the job she was given? What matters more? > [@Magiver](#): > > Gore tried to cherry pick a couple of counties and the Supreme Court said no. It’s as simple as that. You’re factually wrong. It’s as simple as _that_. > [@septimus](#): > > What really bothered me was that the 9 Justices of SCOTUS voted exactly according to their appointing party. Does _anyone_ sincerely believe that the 9 Justices all voted according to their conscience and interpretation of law, and the political line-up was coincidence? Same question as above. If they _had_ voted in favor of the Constitution and democracy, whose vote would have been different and whose the same? > [@](#): > > Also bothersome is the idea that FoxNews’ premature victory announcement fostered a preconception which carried over to the recounting; i.e. that Gore was a loser trying to overturn Bush’s legitimate victory. Did FoxNews’ premature announcement indeed have that effect? Of course, as it was intended to. Fox’s coverage was being directed by GWB’s own cousin, who was in close contact with GWB’s brother, the FL Governor, the entire night to coordinate reporting. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > Huh? All the networks originally called it for Gore, then they switched it to Bush early the next day, then they switched it back to undecided a little bit later. \*Following \*Fox’s “lead”. > [@Bricker](#): > > Interestingly, that analysis completely fails to mention – one might even say “conceals” – the fact that it was not five, but seven Supreme Court justices that decided Florida’s decision was violative of Equal Protection. UNinterestlngly given your partisan record here, that statement fails to mention – one might even say “conceals” – the fact that they did not say what the violation was. As we know, including you , two justices found that there was an underlying EP violation in the use of different voting technologies, which is obviously true. Only five asserted that the differing amounts of correction thereby required to fix the problem were themselves an EP violation. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/33 "2010-11-26T17:18:44Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > It’s not clear whether you disagree that Fox News was first to call Bush winner (it was), By what, 30 seconds? And this is after all the networks, including Fox had earlier called it for Gore. > [@](#): > > or whether such media pronouncements influenced the public perception on post-election manoeuvres (perhaps debatable). When Fox called it, other networks may have followed in “self-defense.” May have? They all used the same polling data from… can’t remember the source, but they all had the same data. But if I had to pick a reason why Americans might have thought Gore was “the loser” it would be because he conceded the election at one point. Not that I agree that Americans thought that, but if they did, that was probably why. > [@](#): > > I wonder if you would agree that America’s failure to simply _count those votes_ in a straightforward fashion made a travesty of American democracy, regardless of which party benefited. Well, that’s the problem righ there. There wasn’t a “straightforward” fashion for doing the recount. > [@](#): > > (Perhaps one of [these](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2000) [links](http://www.angelfire.com/journal2/davismi/bushtheft.html) would be of interest.) Puh-leez. Your first link is to a wikipedia article that looks like it’s about 20 pages long. If something in that link talks about that mean old Fox News network, quote it. ---
**Author:** ![Pierrot\_Le\_Fou](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f475e1/32.png) [@Pierrot\_Le\_Fou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pierrot_Le_Fou)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/34 "2010-11-26T17:27:49Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > What really bothered me was that the 9 Justices of SCOTUS voted exactly according to their appointing party. Does _anyone_ sincerely believe that the 9 Justices all voted according to their conscience and interpretation of law, and the political line-up was coincidence? Appointing party of Bush/Gore justices: William Rehnquist - Republican John P. Stevens - Republican Sandra Day O’Connor - Republican Antonin Scalia - Republican Anthony Kennedy - Republican David Souter - Republican Clarence Thomas - Republican Ruth Bader Ginsburg - Democratic Stephen Breyer - Democratic Seven Republican justices, 2 Democratic justices. None of the decisions reached by the justices broke down on appointing party. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/35 "2010-11-26T17:42:17Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s not what happened. Fox – and every other network – first called the election in Florida for Gore. > > So I assume you’d now like to explore how much of an effect that had in helping Gore? Or is your view that it’s of interest only if it goes the other way? 😕 😕 The polls were already closed. Any helpful effect was in the coming days, as controversy developed. 😕 I’m insulted when someone replies without enough consideration to realize they’re arguing only against an inadvertantly self-invented strawman. I don’t know what the delay was between Fox News declaration and other networks’ (was it as little as 30 seconds? Cite?), but however small, sources I read suggested other networks _did_ follow Fox’s lead. Does Mr. Mace disagree that there is a pressure for a network to call an election after a competitor does? (I mentioned the long Wiki article for the thread’s benefit, e.g. to reference the peculiar glitch in Volusia County.) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/36 "2010-11-26T17:54:20Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I don’t know what the delay was between Fox News declaration and other networks’ (was it as little as 30 seconds? Cite?), No cite, hence the “?”. Wikipedia says it was “minutes” > [@](#): > > but however small, sources I read suggested other networks _did_ follow Fox’s lead. What sources? > [@](#): > > Does Mr. Mace disagree that there is a pressure for a network to call an election after a competitor does? In general, yes. In this particular case, no. It really came down to all the networks relying on [The Voter News Service:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_News_Service) > [@](#): > > During the course of the evening, it [VNS] first called the closely contested state of Florida for Al Gore, then George W. Bush, and then as ‘too close to call’. Critics argued that the state should never have been called until the state’s fate was clear. The Voter News Service also received specific criticism for calling the state of Florida for Al Gore before the polls closed in the Florida panhandle, which was located in the Central Time Zone and heavily Republican. In addition, criticism also came because of the call for Bush which occurred before precincts in Broward, Palm Beach Volusia, and Miami-Dade Counties, all democratic, reported their results to the state which occurred after the networks called the state for Bush well after 2 AM eastern standard time. One could argue all kinds of bias being injected into the minds of Americans depending on which fubar one focuses on. > [@](#): > > (I mentioned the long Wiki article for the thread’s benefit, e.g. to reference the peculiar glitch in Volusia County.) OK. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/37 "2010-11-26T17:58:40Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Y > You’re factually wrong. It’s as simple as _that_. > . FLORIDA Supreme Court. Gore attempted to recount only Broward, Miami Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia County. These were Heavily Democratic counties and he was trying to mine discarded votes in only those counties. This is not disputable. He also tried to invalidate absentee military votes. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/38 "2010-11-26T18:15:31Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Gore … also tried to invalidate absentee military votes. Poorly phrased. He tried to invalidate those absentee military votes _which did not meet legal qualifications._ I’m sure you knew this. On the SDMB, do we really need to mischaracterize simple facts, for partisan purpose? Since you’ve given the _Know-Nothing right-wing view_ on those absentee ballots, let me quote a [left-wing view](http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/dec2000/mili-d01.shtml): > [@](#): > > The bulk of these disqualifications, however, were not due to supposed technicalities, but to gross irregularities such as voting in the wrong county, voting while unregistered, voting more than once (many overseas absentees in Florida were sent two ballots and returned them both, but only one was counted) or the absence of a signature attesting to the voter’s identity. After the Bush campaign filed a blizzard of lawsuits and most counties rechecked the overseas ballots, only a few hundred votes were restored out of the over 1,500 disqualified. > > Even these votes included major irregularities, such as votes postmarked or witnessed after Election Day, ballots which arrived after the November 17 deadline, and even ballots that were faxed in. One county election supervisor admitted that, in response to Republican protests, she had done exactly what the Republicans claimed to oppose: “It changed from following strict adherence to statutory law to a more general interpretation based on new information, basically,‘’ said Stephanie Thomas, assistant supervisor of elections in Clay County. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/39 "2010-11-26T18:23:44Z")
A point often overlooked by those who would much prefer to. By strict standards, a lot of those irregular ballots weren’t valid, but were made valid by the process of shrieking, screaming, and tearing hair over thie ghastly disrespect for Our Heroes displayed by the unpatriotic Dems. And, IIRC, the Dems caved, the votes were counted. ---
**Author:** ![Capitaine\_Zombie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e95f7d/32.png) [@Capitaine\_Zombie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capitaine_Zombie)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2010, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878/40 "2010-11-26T18:24:22Z")
We should send the Governor of California back in time to kill Sandra O’Connor. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-sandra-day-oconnor-ruin-her-legacy-with-bush-vs-gore/561878.md?page=3)