2000 election - SPILLED MILK THE 2000 ELECTION and SOUR GRAPES Joby Martin SPILLED MILK AND SOUR GRAPES THE 2000 ELECTION I The Results a Numbers i

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
SPILLED MILK and SOUR GRAPES THE 2000 ELECTION Joby Martin 3/6/05
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
SPILLED MILK AND SOUR GRAPES THE 2000 ELECTION I. The Results a. Numbers i. Nationally 1. Gore: 50,999,897 (48.38%) 2. Bush: 50,456,002 (47.87%) ii. in Florida 1. Gore: 2,912,253 (48.38%) 2. Bush: 2.912,790 (48.84%) b. The Outcome i. Bush declared winner ii. All eyes on Florida II. Voting Irregularities a. Voting rights in Florida i. The law 1. ex-felons 2. absentee ballots b. Katherine Harris and Database Tech i. Ex-felons 1. similar names 2. similar social security number 3. similar address 4. 80% match of vital info ii. Misdemeanors iii. “possible felons” list 1. help from deep in the heart of… 2. additional 8,000 names iv. 173,000 c. black voters barred from polls 1. 90% of black male votes went to Gore d. absentee ballots i. 2 of 10 for Gore ii. 6 of 10 for Bush iii. NY Times investigation III. The aftermath a. Supreme Court decision IV. Need for exhaustive investigation
Background image of page 2
Databases Used Lexis Nexis EBSCO United States Commission of Civil Rights Library of Congress University of Michigan Document Center Florida State Law Florida Department of State Supreme Court Archives Various Newspaper Archives (nytimes.com, washingtonpost.com, etc.) News Sources NY Times LA Times Washington Post AP News Wire The Nation Experts Consulted John Baer, Philadelphia Daily News Staff Writer (also consulted for previous paper, Grains of Salt ) Edward Mercuri, Political Science Professor, University of California at Berkeley (was also my Civics teacher at Monterey High during sabbatical)
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
In mid-January, house Democrats challenged the results of the 2004 election, demanding a recount in the state of Ohio. Their actions seemed, to many, laughable. There was little doubt in the minds of both America’s people and its politicians that George W. Bush had won, fair and square. And yet Democrats still felt the need to challenge the result. Senator Barbara Boxer (D- CA), who led the call for investigation and recount, was questioned numerous times as to exactly what was causing her suspicion surrounding the result. She was motivated by guilt, she said afterward. She, as well as virtually other Senator, stood mute as the maelstrom surrounding the 2000 election ran their course. She felt guilty having not acted more assertively before the storm passed, leaving her party in the losing corner. Talk about a day late and a buck short. The 2000 election has quickly taken its place both in history and in infamy. It was, by far, the most hotly contested election ever, with mere tenths of percentage points making up the difference in many states. It was the first election in which the man who received more votes, Al Gore, was not named President of the United States. It was the first election to, essentially, be decided not by the people, but by the Supreme Court.
Background image of page 4
Image of page 5
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/17/2008 for the course POLS 120 taught by Professor Dr.brent during the Winter '08 term at San Jose State University .

Page1 / 10

2000 election - SPILLED MILK THE 2000 ELECTION and SOUR GRAPES Joby Martin SPILLED MILK AND SOUR GRAPES THE 2000 ELECTION I The Results a Numbers i

This preview shows document pages 1 - 5. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online