# They Threw away 19,000 votes! Gore actually won! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 9, 2000, 8:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427 "2000-11-09T08:30:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![KellyM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/57b2e6/32.png) [@KellyM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyM)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/121 "2000-11-10T03:57:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by rocking chair \* > \*\*the only thing that is being decided now is the popular vote. the election will not be final until after the electorial college meets in december. the electorial voter could decide to be independent and vote conscience rather than party line. \*\* Electors in Florida are sworn to vote for the candidates of the party for which they were appointed. If Bush’s electors win the election in Florida, it would be a breach of their oath as electors to vote for Gore (or anyone else). ---
**Author:** ![rocking\_chair](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocking_chair/32/2918_2.png) [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/122 "2000-11-10T04:25:27Z")
there have been “faithless votes” in the history of the college. 9 of them in total. the “faithless votes” were counted and certified. two states that i know of have penalties for “faithless votes.” states trying absolutly bind the votes have been shot down. the ec is an independent body and could even write in a person. just because they were sworn doesn’t mean in this situation they may set that aside. they (the florida electorial voters) may feel that some florida voices weren’t heard. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/123 "2000-11-10T04:54:59Z")
There’s another problem with demanding re-counts and especially hand counts. The problem with hand counts is that they will no doubt return different results than the machine counts, because some ballots right on the threshold of machine readability will differ. The problem is this: by only calling for hand-counts in specific districts, Gore can manipulate the election. For example, let’s say that Gore wins 10 districts and loses 11. If he calls for a hand count ONLY in the areas he lost, he improves his chances of winning, because he has nothing to lose. Perhaps the 10 districts he won would go the other way in a hand count, but if he can selectively eliminate any possible down-side, he gives himself an advantage over Bush. If you call for a hand count, it should apply to all districts in the state. Period. What the U.S. needs is an amendment to the Constitution for a provision similar to Florida’s - if the electoral college majority could be changed by any state, AND that state has results that differ by less than 1/2%, then the entire election must be held over. It’ll probably never happen again, but it would avoid this kind of situation. ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/124 "2000-11-10T04:56:58Z")
> [@](#): > > What I’m saying is that someone should have fixed the problem.How about an American Occasionaly democrats are known to be Americans.🙂 It seems to me that this county elects an Election Chairperson. Since the county is full of democrats, they voted in a democrat. This is the person who was responsible for making sure this worked out. This is a **PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION** matter, not a matter of personal liberties. The democrats screwed up the election that THEY ran, and now they don’t like the results so they want to do it over. NO WAY. The comment was tongue in cheek to begin with, but there is a grain of truth buried in there. ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/125 "2000-11-10T05:00:59Z")
**am Stone** > [@](#): > > There’s another problem with demanding re-counts and especially hand counts. The problem with hand counts is that they will no doubt return different results than the machine counts, because some ballots right on the threshold of machine readability will differ. My understanding of Florida law on this is: Someone can request a handcount of 3 preciicts. 1% of those precincts are then counted. As long as the sample is consistent with the expected results, they stop. I do not know how much tolerance they allow. Once again, I could be wrong on this, I am not a Florida Election law expert. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/126 "2000-11-10T05:17:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > > What the U.S. needs is an amendment to the Constitution for a provision similar to Florida’s - if the electoral college majority could be changed by any state, AND that state has results that differ by less than 1/2%, then the entire election must be held over. Hmmm…An interesting idea. But, what if the vote is very close to differing by 1/2%…Then do you get a recount to see which side of 1/2% difference it lies on? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/127 "2000-11-10T06:17:37Z")
It’s amazing watching this debate go back and forth on this board (of which, in this thread at least, I’ve participated quite a bit). It comes down to this: Bush **won**. However: Gore **should** have won. There is nearly NO DOUBT about this. The voters in PBC would easily put Gore over the limit and take the state from Bush regardless of how absentee ballots went. The final question mark in this whole thing is the fairness of the design of ballots in PBC. Frankly, I think it’s weak. I can see where confusion can creep in but they’re the only assholes in the nation stupid enough to screw-up their ballots so royally. In the end it’s their own dumbass fault and they should have to live with that (and, unfortunately, the rest of us with them). **BUT!** Make no mistake Bush supporters! Bush may become president but it’s as empty as a victory can be. Barring any weird surprises from absentee ballots Gore CLEARLY won the election…both the Popular Vote and the Electoral Vote had PBC not F’d up. The voters in PBC may have been retarded but any rational look at the numbers shows Gore ABSOLUTELY should have won the state of Florida. If you don’t think this’d be the case then you shouldn’t give a crap about a re-vote. All this sucks really. At first it was a bit exciting but now the president will know he has the office under dubious circumstances. Bush would know he didn’t really win and Gore would know he was there by seriously bending (if not breaking) laws to get there. It’s a sad time if you think about it… ---
**Author:** ![Soup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/977dab/32.png) [@Soup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Soup)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/128 "2000-11-10T11:47:37Z")
I’ve been going back and forth on my opinions during this whole fascinating process. First: this is NOT a sad time. We’re showing the rest of the world how a great democracy deals with an extraordinary election. No riots. No military in the streets. It will be resolved and the nation will carry on. I’m of the opinion now that if Al Gore loses, cries of “foul” would be wrong. This election is the statistical equivalent of a coin flip. The “will of the people” won’t be denied if either wins. It’s apparent that America could not get solidly behind either candidate. There’s always been ballots that are nullified. I’m sure every state had many. If the election shouldn’t hinge on these ballots I feel this situation more of a statement against Al Gore (and Bill Clinton). After years of prosperity, it should have been a cakewalk into the White House. If Gore had won his home state, he’d be President. What happened? ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/129 "2000-11-10T13:09:21Z")
> [@](#): > > Gore CLEARLY won the election…both the Popular Vote and the Electoral Vote I am getting ready to take this popular vote victory claim garbage to the pit. The popular vote count is not done. The popular vote count is irrelevant. Nobody was trying to win the popular vote, if they were, the results would have been different. How many people in the panhandle of Florida didn’t vote bacause Florida was called? How many Republicans didn’t vote in New York, Hawai, New Jersey, Mass., Texas, Oklahoma… etc… because the rules of the game made the electoral college important, not the popular vote. I don’t know…Do you? Of course not. The popular vote is not a gauge of the will of the people in this case. Even if it was…and the difference came down to 200,000 votes nationwide, should we have a recount to make sure everything was counted correctly? What about vote fraud? How many of those votes were fraudulent? **The popular vote is irrelevant** btw…Gore did not clearly win the electoral college either, or we would now have a president-elect Gore. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/130 "2000-11-10T13:24:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*The problem is this: by only calling for hand-counts in specific districts, Gore can manipulate the election. For example, let’s say that Gore wins 10 districts and loses 11. If he calls for a hand count ONLY in the areas he lost, he improves his chances of winning, because he has nothing to lose. Perhaps the 10 districts he won would go the other way in a hand count, but if he can selectively eliminate any possible down-side, he gives himself an advantage over Bush. > > If you call for a hand count, it should apply to all districts in the state. Period.\*\* I agree with you that a hand count should be consistent to all districts, but for the exact opposite reason. The supposed purpose of the hand count is to tally all those votes that were missed by the machine because the holes were not accurately punched etc. This means that any machine will miss a random amount of ballots, which will than be added by the hand count. By limiting the recount to districts that he **won** , Gore ensures that most of the missed votes that are added are his. I think there is a genuine possibility that the selective hand recount will tip the election to Gore. I hope the Bush people can still go back and ask for hand recounts elsewhere, but I’m unsure if this is possible, as many counties have already “certified” their results. ---
**Author:** ![SouthernStyle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@SouthernStyle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SouthernStyle)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/131 "2000-11-10T14:26:40Z")
The people that are demanding a re-vote have no idea how dangerous a precedent they are trying to establish. The first problem is that by law there is a clearly established “election day”. Nowhere is there a provision to move the voting in Palm Beach county to a later day. Despite my best efforts, I can also not find anything that states that a revote can be conducted because it was raining in Texas and Ohio. The second problem is that a re-vote in PBC says to the rest of the country that your votes matter only so far as to establish that without PBC no candidate received the necessary majority. The president of the United States will be determined SOLELY on the outcome of one county that is being allowed to vote AFTER the other outcomes are known. The third problem is that ballot irregularities happen all over the country. Everywhere. The legalally prescribed manner for dealing with them is to void any ballot that is not filled out according to the rules. An election day has been established by law. Every citizen has the option of voting PRIOR to election day via an absentee ballot. Even absentee ballots, which are at the mercy of the USPS and international mail expire 10 days past the election date. If the final vote in Florida comes down to 1 vote, and 2 absentee ballots from Zimbabwe arrive on February 1 that would change the outcome, do you propose that they be allowed to count and that the election results be reversed? ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/132 "2000-11-10T15:04:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Freedom2 \* > **How many people in the panhandle of Florida didn’t vote bacause Florida was called?** None of them. By the time Florida was called at 8PM EST, the polls had closed in the Panhandle at 7PM CST. Florida law states that the polls open and close according to the time observed by the county seat, meaning that polls in the Eastern Time Zone close at 7PM EST and those in Central Time close at 7PM CST. Everybody who wanted to vote had their chance to do so before Florida was called. How much effect this had on voters in Mountain, Pacific and Alaska Time Zones, I can’t say. But when you consider Bush took every state in those Zones except California, Washington, New Mexico and Hawaii, I don’t think it made much difference at all. (Oregon is still too close to call, but Gore has a much bigger lead there [3375] than Bush has in Florida. I got these figures from [http://www.cnn.com/](http://www.cnn.com/) .) > [@](#): > > **The popular vote is irrelevant** How can you claim this after complaining that some people may not have voted because it was called too soon? If the PV is irrelevant, then it makes no difference if people vote, right? (Yes, I do understand the Electoral College.) ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/133 "2000-11-10T15:12:09Z")
> [@](#): > > None of them. By the time Florida was called at 8PM EST, the polls had closed in the Panhandle at 7PM CST. Not true. I do not know what time they called the Florida race. I am pretty sure that it was after 7:30 est, but I think everyone agrees that the polls were still open in the panhandle when they called it. > [@](#): > > How can you claim this after complaining that some people may not have voted because it was called too soon? There are two points there: One: People in the panhandle did not vote. This does not only effect the popular vote totals, but it effects the Florida totals which are so close. Two: I am pointing out reasons **WHY** the popular vote total is irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/134 "2000-11-10T15:28:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Danielinthewolvesden \* > **1. That ballot was illegal.** And it was illegal for two reasons, not just the one that’s been bandied about. Besides the fact that the holes to be punched were to the left of some names, they were also in the wrong order. According to Florida law, the names of all the candidates must be placed in the same order that they finished in the primary AND with the space-to-be-marked-or-punched to the right of the name _meaning the holes must ALSO be in the SAME order._ By placing the hole between the names, the hole for Buchanan was second. I don’t know where Buchanan finished in the primary (if he competed at all), but I’d bet my last dollar it wasn’t second, ahead of Gore and behind Bush. Here’s the trouble, though: They may decide that the ballot was illegally designed _by accident_, without the intent to commit fraud. It could be called negligence, but not grossly so. If so, no law was broken and the 19,000 votes would stay thrown out and there would be no new election. If the ballot had been arranged differently, and people had accidentally voted for both Gore and _Bush_, I bet the Republicans would be now complaining as loudly as the Democrats. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/135 "2000-11-10T15:28:59Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by **Bricker** _ > > The purpose of sending the ballots out ahead of time - as was done in West Palm Beach - is to give all affected parties a chance to complain about any unfairness they see. > > Since no one did so before the election, they may not be heard to complain now… Does anybody know if these ballots have been used in Palm Beach before, and, if so, if there were problems? I’m inclined to think that if this was the first time using these particular ballots, seeing them and using them are two different things. They may have _seemed_ ok by all interested parties, but when you actually have the people _use_ them, like beta testing, all the bugs come out. However, if these types of ballots had been used before, were these problems ever encountered before? My impression was that these were newly-designed ballots in use for the first time, but I could be wrong. Esprix ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/136 "2000-11-10T16:02:11Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by Esprix \* \*\* > [@](#): > > My impression was that these were newly-designed ballots in use for the first time, but I could be wrong. > \*\* Acording to what I’ve seen, they have been used before in that district. (They are also widely used in other parts of the country as well). ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/137 "2000-11-10T16:05:40Z")
> [@](#): > > And it was illegal for two reasons, not just the one that’s been bandied about. Besides the fact that the holes to be punched were to the left of some names, they were also in the wrong order. According to Florida law, the names of all the candidates must be placed in the same order that they finished in the primary AND with the space-to-be-marked-or-punched to the right of the name meaning the holes must ALSO be in the SAME order. By placing the hole between the names, the hole for Buchanan was second. There are two laws being quoted. One is for for ballots that are counted electronicaly, and the other is for hand counted ballots. The law regulating electronic ballots is very specific that the holes can be on **EITHER** side of the candidate. (right or left) If you choose to use a butterfly ballot, it seems reasonable that you would have to choose whether or not placing candidates in order would be done by using the holes, or by using a specific side. As long as you were consistent in your choice, it would be hard to argue that the candidates were in the wrong order. Choosing a butterfly ballot may seem strange to those of us who have never seen them before, but they seem to be used all over the country in different places. This is not some strange new PalmBeach creation. A butterfly ballot is a legitimate ballot. The vote is in. All these arguements are vain little attempts to steal the election. It was close, but they lost. Live with it. ---
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/138 "2000-11-10T16:10:16Z")
> [@](#): > > Besides the fact that the holes to be punched were to the left of some names, they were also in the wrong order. According to Florida law, the names of all the candidates must be placed in the same order that they finished in the primary AND with the space-to-be-marked-or-punched to the right of the name meaning the holes must ALSO be in the SAME order. KeithT already posted a section of Florida law stating that holes may be placed to the right **or** left of the names, so this is incorrect. The candidates names probably **are** in the order in which the finished in the primaries. If you read like most Americans, you read down the left-hand side starting with Gore, to the bottom, then up to the top of the right-hand page, where Buchanan is. Now, the **smart** thing to do, since there were enough candidates to flow onto two pages, **would** have been to put all the holes to the right of the names. Since the Democrats in Palm County designed this ballot, looks like they are hoist on their own petard. Maybe next time they’ll pay more attention to the potential repurcussions of their actions. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Corrado](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a88e4f/32.png) [@John\_Corrado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Corrado)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/139 "2000-11-10T16:45:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Esprix \* > However, if these types of ballots had been used before, were these problems ever encountered before? > > Esprix I don’t know for certain whether these types of ballots were used in '96; however, in '96 over 15,000 ballots in PBC were thrown out due to double-voting for President. Given the increase in voter turn-out, the current 19K thrown out is about the same number. I’ve also heard reports that “butterfly ballots” such as these were used in Chicago and Pennsylvania this year with no reports of such problems. But I don’t have an exact cite for that. ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427/140 "2000-11-10T17:09:05Z")
OK, so what if there were some 15,000 thrown out for this before? Two wrongs make a right? No. But in 1996, those 15,000 didn’t matter, so nobody really cared. Now they do, so they get noticed. If you get pulled over by a copy for going 90 mph, do you say, “But when I drove by here yesterday, nothing happened!”? And whether or not the butterfly ballots caused a problem elsewhere isn’t really the issue (at least not for me). Whether they were _legal_ is the issue, as far as I’m concerned. If they were, then those folks are screwed. Maybe they’ll pay more attention next time. If they were not, then we come to a more difficult situation. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/they-threw-away-19-000-votes-gore-actually-won/40427.md?page=8)