Undervotes
I’ve stayed out of the whole “stolen” election issue, because I tend to believe that both sides play pretty dirty whenever they can. I’m all for creating a more transparent system, and having a paper trail, and a host of other electoral reforms (such as instant runoff voting) but I’ve never seen anything conclusive showing that either Florida 2000, or Ohio 2004 was an orchestrated fraud. Sure, there was lots of hanky-panky to make it difficult for Democrats to vote in both states, but that’s a little different than outright rigging the election. So I was surprised to see Krugman come out so strongly in today’s op-ed:
In his recent book “Steal This Vote” - a very judicious work, despite its title - Andrew Gumbel, a U.S. correspondent for the British newspaper The Independent, provides the best overview I’ve seen of the 2000 Florida vote. And he documents the simple truth: “Al Gore won the 2000 presidential election.”
Two different news media consortiums reviewed Florida’s ballots; both found that a full manual recount would have given the election to Mr. Gore. This was true despite a host of efforts by state and local officials to suppress likely Gore votes, most notably Ms. Harris’s “felon purge,” which disenfranchised large numbers of valid voters.
This is such a strong statement that I felt it was worth taking a look to see whether it holds up. I found this interesting comment by Rick Hasen, who runs the Election Law blog:
I have not yet had a chance to read Gumbel’s book, but Krugman’s statement is misleading. It is true that the NORC study found that had all the state’s undervotes and overvotes been counted, Al Gore would have come out ahead of George Bush. But it is also true that Gore did not request such a count—he requested a count only of the undervotes, and only in certain counties. And, if I recall correctly, a statewide recount of the undervotes (what had been ordered by the Florida Supreme Court but stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court in its stay order in Bush v. Gore) also would have gone for Bush. It is also true that the NORC counters’ views of which ballots counted for Gore depended in part on the partisan affiliation of the counters. (I review the literature on the count in this review essay.)
Rick argues that the vote was a statistical tie, and so any number of factors affecting the recounting could have tipped it one way or another, but the fact is that no matter what the decision had been in Bush v. Gore, the election would still probably have gone for Bush.
Kevin Drum earlier made similar remarks over claims regarding fraud in Ohio. (With more here.)
In the end, I think we need to do better to remove the stench of corruption from these elections, but I think it is even more important for the Democrats to construct a broadly appealing progressive agenda so that the election outcome will not rely upon one percent of the population swinging the vote this way or that. Remember, Gore lost his home state and he lost states where Democrats were elected to Governor and Senate. It never should have come down to Florida in the first place!
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
They would also be impossible in Taiwan, where paper ballots are used and openly and publicly counted, and there are many polling stations. Both elections were obviously stolen, as statistical studies show (just look at the difference between optical scanners and touch systems in Fla in 2004), and it isn’t a coincidence that the Right has risen as e-voting has risen. The sad part is that Americans have an instinct for the middle that makes it difficult for them to face fraud when it stands up and barks at them.
The e-voting systems have been suspect since the election of Reagan, who immediately quashed two indictments against the polling machine companies when he came into office. Since then, the Republicans have been partnered with them. There are many sites that list some details of the widespread fraud….
http://ideamouth.com/voterfraud.htm#FL
Fraud also took place in many small ways. On the campus where my father teachers, the Republicans opened a booth asking for names in support of an initiative for legalization of mary jane. Since legalizers vote democrat, after taking the names, they then matched them against registered voters and removed those voter registrations from the system. There were cases of similar trashing of dem registrations in several states.
It’s not difficult to see that massive and systematic fraud took place. The hard part is getting people to accept that it happened.
Michael
I’m sorry Michael, but I think those web sites are wacky. Not that everything they say is wrong - there was fraud - but I don’t believe it adds up to a systematic conspiracy. The simple fact is that the polling showed it would be a close race before the election and during the exit polls, and there was historically high voter turnout on both sides. What I am saying is that it never should have been that close in the first place.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
An anthropologist and documentary filmmaker, 
Problems such as this would be impossible under the elections laws we use in Canada. Although I have not found Americans very willing to accpt this suggestion.