washingtonpost.com  > Politics > Elections > 2000 > White House

Florida Recounts Would Have Favored Bush

But Study Finds Gore Might Have Won Statewide Tally of All Uncounted Ballots

By Dan Keating and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, November 12, 2001; Page A01

In all likelihood, George W. Bush still would have won Florida and the presidency last year if either of two limited recounts -- one requested by Al Gore, the other ordered by the Florida Supreme Court -- had been completed, according to a study commissioned by The Washington Post and other news organizations.

But if Gore had found a way to trigger a statewide recount of all disputed ballots, or if the courts had required it, the result likely would have been different. An examination of uncounted ballots throughout Florida found enough where voter intent was clear to give Gore the narrowest of margins.

_____Virtual Voting Booth_____
Your Chance to Decide the Outcome
_____Ballot Data_____
All ballot data, along with supplemental surveys and other information gathered by the media group, can be viewed on the NORC Web site.
_____Video Extras_____
Dead Heat
Ballot Review
Results and Reform
Post's Keating on MSNBC
_____Live Online_____
Transcript: Dan Keating, Washington Post Analyst
_____Related Articles_____
Democratic Hopefuls Score Bush (The Washington Post, Feb 23, 2003)
White House Silent on Racial Controversy (The Washington Post, Jan 5, 2003)
Getting the Votes -- And the Kudos (The Washington Post, Jan 1, 2003)
Bush, Gore Campaign Costs Questioned (The Washington Post, Dec 11, 2002)
Mr. Resident (The Washington Post, Nov 17, 2002)
_____Related Graphics_____
Ballot Blunders
Should Dimples Count?
Overvotes, Optical Ballots Key
Limited Review Favors Bush
Ballots and Race
Recounts Are Subjective
_____Supreme Court_____
Full Text: The Opinion (PDF)
Opinion Excerpt
Stevens's Dissent
Ginsburg's Dissent
Baker Reaction: Text and Video

The study showed that if the two limited recounts had not been short-circuited -- the first by Florida county and state election officials and the second by the U.S. Supreme Court -- Bush would have held his lead over Gore, with margins ranging from 225 to 493 votes, depending on the standard. But the study also found that whether dimples are counted or amore restrictive standard is used, a statewide tally favored Gore by 60 to 171 votes.

Gore's narrow margin in the statewide count was the result of a windfall in overvotes. Those ballots -- on which a voter may have marked a candidate's name and also written it in -- were rejected by machines as a double vote on Election Day and most also would not have been included in either of the limited recounts.

The study by The Post and other media groups, an unprecedented effort that involved examining 175,010 ballots in 67 counties, underscores what began to be apparent as soon as the polls closed in the nation's third most populous state Nov. 7, 2000: that no one can say with certainty who actually won Florida. Under every scenario used in the study, the winning margin remains less than 500 votes out of almost 6 million cast.

For 36 days after the election, the results in Florida remained in doubt, and so did the winner of the presidency. Bush emerged victorious when the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5 to 4 ruling, agreed with his lawyers' contention that the counting should end. Since then, many Gore partisans have accused the court of unfairly aborting a process that would have put their candidate ahead.

But an examination of the disputed ballots suggests that in hindsight the battalions of lawyers and election experts who descended on Florida pursued strategies that ended up working against the interests of their candidates.

The study indicates, for example, that Bush had less to fear from the recounts underway than he thought. Under any standard used to judge the ballots in the four counties where Gore lawyers had sought a recount -- Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade and Volusia -- Bush still ended up with more votes than Gore, according to the study. Bush also would have had more votes if the limited statewide recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court and then stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court had been carried through.

Had Bush not been party to short-circuiting those recounts, he might have escaped criticism that his victory hinged on legal maneuvering rather than on counting the votes.

In Gore's case, the decision to ask for recounts in four counties rather than seek a statewide recount ultimately had far greater impact. But in the chaos of the early days of the recount battle, when Gore needed additional votes as quickly as possible and recounts in the four heavily Democratic counties offered him that possibility, that was not so obvious.

Nor was there any guarantee that Gore could have succeeded in getting a statewide recount. Florida law provided no mechanism to ask for a statewide recount, only county-by-county recounts. And although he did at one point call on Bush to join him in asking for a statewide recount, it was with the condition that Bush renounce all further legal action. Bush dismissed the offer, calling it a public relations gesture by his opponent, and Gore never took any further steps toward that goal.

White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, responding to the study, said, "The voters settled this election last fall, and the nation moved on a long time ago. The White House isn't focused on this; the voters aren't focused on it." Fleischer called the results "superfluous."

Gore, in a written statement, did not respond directly to the study. "As I said on Dec. 13th of last year, we are a nation of laws and the presidential election of 2000 is over," he said. "And of course, right now our country faces a great challenge as we seek to successfully combat terrorism. I fully support President Bush's efforts to achieve that goal."

Gore said he remained appreciative of the support he received last year and "proud of the values and ideals for which we fought."

CONTINUED    1 2 3 4    Next >

© 2001 The Washington Post Company