« Brett Barboursville and the Case of the Hairy Egyptian | Main | Return of the Hamster »

July 30, 2004

Stop Lying About The 2000 Election

"I come from Florida, where you and others participated in what I call the United States coup d'etat. We need to make sure it doesn't happen again," Brown said. "Over and over again after the election when you stole the election, you came back here and said, 'Get over it.' No, we're not going to get over it. And we want verification from the world." - Rep. Corrine Brown
"George W. Bush and his brother the Governor STOLE THIS ELECTION..." U.S. Congressman Robert Wexler, D-FL (March 8, 2004)

Almost four years after the 2000 election, lawmakers (who ought to know better) are still making remarks like this. House members voted to strike Ms. Brown's words from the record. The vote fell along strict party lines which, considering the facts in the matter, is shameful.

As the old saying goes, "where there's smoke, there's fire". I'm not sure that whoever coined that old chestnut envisioned a concerted effort to blow smoke and fan the flames of resentment and suspicion, knowing full well there they have no basis in fact.

But it's not surprising that this particular fire keeps burning when prominent Democrats continually stir the embers, lest it die out. AEI examines the continuing attempts of the DNC to mislead voters about what really happened in 2000:

You know that the political debate has been poisoned when 85 percent of African-Americans feel President Bush stole the 2000 election. At least that is what a CBS poll released last Friday finds.
Possibly this just reflects the same 85 percent of African-Americans who disapprove of the job that Bush is doing. But if nobody really believes the election was stolen and it is all window dressing, it is hard to explain why the Democrats keep raising the issue at almost every possible opportunity.
Michael Moore is not alone in asserting the election was stolen. On Monday night at the Democratic Convention, both former Vice President Al Gore and former President Bill Clinton raised the election issue that “this time every vote is counted” and “this year, we're going to make sure they're all counted.”
Before both the NAACP and the Urban League during July, Senator John Kerry said that in 2000 there were “a million disenfranchised African Americans” and that it was the “most tainted election in history.”

One million disenfranchined African Americans. I’d like to see the data Senator Kerry used to back up that assertion. It doesn’t exist.

Jesse Jackson recently claimed that “in the year 2000, the loser won and the winner lost” and that “our birthright was stolen.”
The continued charges of Bush stealing the election from Gore are remarkable considering that exhaustive studies by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and newspaper organizations have found little, if any evidence voter harassment, intimidation and disenfranchisement occurred in Florida.

Lets look at the facts:
Summary of official results (Florida Department of Elections)

2,912,790 - George Bush
2,912,253 - Al Gore
97,488 - Ralph Nader
17,484 - Pat Buchanan
16,407 - Browne
2,281 - Hagelin
1,804 - Morehead votes
1,371 - Phillips
622 - McReynolds
562 - Harris
34 - Chote
6 - McCarthy
5,963,110 - Total votes cast in Florida

113,820 - Overvotes
61,190 - undervotes
175,010 - Total number of disqualified ballots
- 16 counties had higher spoilage rates than Palm Beach but Gore didn’t contest any of them. Because the majority of went to Bush.

- Under Florida election law, candidates are not entitled to manual recounts unless there is an error in tabulation. All recounts are by machine, as Katherine Harris insisted. She was following the law.

- When manual recounts were started, a discrepancy was created between the original machine count and the manual recount, thus giving Gore the opening he needed to demand a statewide manual recount he was not otherwise entitled to under Florida law.

- Despite the Gore campaign's alleged concern for disenfranchised voters, in 2000 they launched a campaign to challenge the votes of active duty military servicemembers because they tend to vote Republican.

In January 2001, the US Civil Rights commission investigated the 2000 election. 6 of 8 commissioners were Democrats. Most unbiased observers would consider this to be somewhat lopsided. Logically one would expect the committee, if they had any bias, to find in favor of the Democrats. Here are their findings:

- No evidence that a single person was intimidated, harassed, or prevented from voting by Florida law enforcement.

- No evidence of systematic disenfranchisement of African-American voters.

- State officials were not at fault for widespread voter disenfranchisement.

- Although some non-felons were erroneously removed from the rolls, “a review of state records, internal e-mails of [Database Technologies] employees and testimony before the Civil Rights Commission and an elections task force showed no evidence that minorities were specifically targeted.” Florida had hired Database Technologies to purge rolls of felons deceased people.This is done because Florida bans felons from voting, unless they had been granted clemency The persistent rumors about large numbers of blacks being disenfranchised is the result of a lack of understanding of simple statistics: although in more blacks than whites were removed overall from the rolls than whites, this occurred because most felons in Florida are black. In other words, if you are a felon living in Florida, you are more likely to be black than white. Statistically, more whites felons than black felons were removed than blacks – i.e., white felons were removed at higher rates than black felons. One possible inference from a statistical standpoint is that white felons were “discriminated against”.

- On charges that Republican election supervisors threw the election: in 24 of the 25 counties with the highest percentage of non-voted ballots for president, the county supervisor was a Democrat. In the remaining county, the supervisor was an independent.

- Ballot spoilage was 14% higher in counties where the election supervisor was a Democrat, 31 % higher where an African American Democrat was in charge. The famed butterfly ballots of Palm Beach County were creations of Democrats.

- The group with the highest rate of ballot spoilage? African-American Repubicans with household incomes over $500,000.

I demand a recount. People are being disenfranchised.

- Cassandra

July 30, 2004 at 11:01 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Stop Lying About The 2000 Election:

» Sex, Lies, And Voter Disenfranchisement? Hardly from Villainous Company
Last year I wrote Stop Lying About The 2000 Election to refute John Kerry's mantra that over 1 million blacks were disenfranchised during the 2000 election. That he would say this infuriated me. As a member of the Senate, his... [Read More]

Tracked on Jun 26, 2005 8:35:07 AM


Pile On, reporting *first* for duty, [saluting with a dumb look on my face like the picture on the Drudge Report trying to figure out why I have been humming the theme to Hogan's Heroes all day].

Let the atrocities begin.

Posted by: Pile On® at Jul 30, 2004 11:09:56 AM

- The group with the highest rate of ballot spoilage? African-American Repubicans with household incomes over $500,000.

How can we possibly know this? We have secret ballots, no vote can be traced back to the person who cast it. I'm confused, but still ready for duty.

Posted by: Pile On® at Jul 30, 2004 11:19:49 AM

Let this be a lesson to you: don't leave your ballot out on the table or it will go bad. Refrigeration is necessary to keep your vote fresh!

Posted by: spd rdr at Jul 30, 2004 11:36:11 AM

"The group with the highest rate of ballot spoilage? African-American Repubicans with household incomes over $500,000."

Impossible. Drug dealers and professional athletes don't vote Republican.

Posted by: Insensitive Bigot Man at Jul 30, 2004 11:41:40 AM

I would imagine (although I am guessing here) we know it in the same way we "know" poor minorities were disenfranchised: by looking at the overall rate of spoilage by county and applying the demographics for that country to the spoilage rate and making the unfounded assumption that the spoilage rate was unrelated to race, gender, or any other factor (i.e., spoilage was evenly applied across the population).

We were told that the uncounted votes were predominantly minority votes because they came from predominantly black counties (supposedly).

Also, people vote in their neighborhoods, at local schools, so that may have been how they "know". If those ballots were collected in an all-black neighborhood with high income, it would be pretty obvious. But again, this is a guess and I have no way of knowing the real answer. Just a few hypotheses.

Posted by: Cassandra at Jul 30, 2004 11:48:25 AM

So if the one person who fits that demo, knew that his ballot was spoiled you could say that demo was 100% disenfranchised.

Posted by: Pile On® at Jul 30, 2004 12:13:22 PM

No.... smart aleck. That is generalizing from a single instance to the general population, which, for reasons of random variation in your choice of the individual, is risky.

They are going the other way around, from the general to the particular. It's supposedly much more statistically valid.

Any implied sarcasm in my last comment is only partially intended, because theoretically it is more valid except that one must be careful about drawing inferences about causation.

We should be talking to Menace - I'm not a professional statistician. I only torture numbers in an amateur status.

Posted by: Cassandra at Jul 30, 2004 12:28:27 PM

Speaking of demographic information, I will repeat this because I presume most of you knee-jerkin' knuckle draggers missed my speech last night.

25% of all African-American children in Harlem have asthma because of hair pollution.

Posted by: John Kerry's Atomic Hair at Jul 30, 2004 12:31:35 PM

Cassandra, I think you misread my post. I was not generalizing from a single instance. Nor was I looking at a representative sample of a given population. I was hypothesizing how the conclusion could be drawn about African-American Repubicans with household incomes over $500,000, by examining the ENTIRE population of one.

Posted by: John Kerry's Atomic Hair at Jul 30, 2004 12:38:52 PM

You are a dork :)

I mean, a fork...

oh, nevermind.

Posted by: Cassandra at Jul 30, 2004 12:46:46 PM

The fact of the matter is that Republicans are omniscient. We do not make assumptions, we state facts.

Conversly, Democrats are unknowing. This, of course, explains how a women could stand in front of a TV camera and state that even though she was a college graduate, she could not understand the Florida ballot. It would also explain, I suppose, how Bill could have all those girlfriends, and Hillary did not have a clue.

Perhaps, if they had only tried to punch one card at a time, they would not have had all those pregnant chads. Dear old Albert "I never found a grad school I couldn't flunk out of" Gore will not bring that little tidbit up, though.

Posted by: RIslander at Jul 30, 2004 6:09:08 PM

This is better than reading Liberal Larry and playing in water. At the same time!

Posted by: La Femme Crickita at Aug 31, 2004 10:34:05 AM