[EL] Facts about the 2000 recount

[Thomas J. Cares]

You know a sad thought: Who believes "the 5" would have still interfered
just as they did, if they felt an absolute certainty Bush would have won
without their interference? (Or as Bill Clinton once put it: if it would
have been Bush behind, it would have been 9-0 to let the recounts continue)

P.S. I don't concede Bush would have won had scotus not interfered.

And of course, Gore pretty certainly would have won had Florida used
Instant Runoff Voting in the general election. No big deal though. *Only
completely pivoted who led the free world for 8 years (and completely
affects how races start: how pressure is put on people not to run; the
practical need for us to mostly fracture into exactly 2 highly-polarized
parties who are terrible at working together). But other than that, Instant
Runoff Voting (and RCV methods for multi-member seats, like the Single
Transferable Vote), is such a fringe concept. Clearly nothing mortifying
about how we do elections in this country. This has been a wonderful hoot,
this last year. What a treat!*

On Friday, October 21, 2016, Douglas Johnson <djohnson at ndcresearch.com>
wrote:

> Just a reminder, since the 2000 recount’s being so often cited by both
> sides, about the follow up study that analyze what the 2000 election
> results would have been:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/us/examining-vote-
> overview-study-disputed-florida-ballots-finds-justices-did-not.html
>
>
>
> And it includes the great 2000 election irony: the 4-county recount Gore
> requested, if granted, would have concluded with Bush still victorious.
>
>
>
> -          Doug
>
>
>
> Douglas Johnson, Ph.D.
>
> Fellow, Rose Institute of State and Local Government
>
> at Claremont McKenna College
>
> douglas.johnson at cmc.edu
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','douglas.johnson at cmc.edu');>
>
> direct: 310-200-2058
>
>
>
> *“6 Facts About Bush v. Gore Worth Remembering Before The Trump Campaign
> Revises History To Death” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87842>*
>
> Posted on October 20, 2016 4:35 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87842>
>  by *Rick Hasen* <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Elie Mystal
> <http://abovethelaw.com/2016/10/6-facts-about-bush-v-gore-worth-remembering-before-the-trump-campaign-revises-history-to-death/>for
> ATL.
>
> [image: hare]
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87842&title=%E2%80%9C6%20Facts%20About%20Bush%20v.%20Gore%20Worth%20Remembering%20Before%20The%20Trump%20Campaign%20Revises%20History%20To%20Death%E2%80%9D>
>
> Posted in Bush v. Gore reflections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=5>
>
>
>


--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161021/d9630483/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 10884 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161021/d9630483/attachment.png>