[EM] Ok, it was Gore, not Kerry in 2000.

[James Green-Armytage]

>
>I want to make that correction before someone else does; I´d said that
>Kerry 
>nearly lost the presidential election because he nearly lost in Florida. 
>Actually, of course, it was Gore who barely won the presidency in 2000.

It depends how you count it, right? As I understand, Gore won if you count
overvotes, but otherwise Bush was still slightly ahead. Overvotes are when
a voter fills in the oval for Gore, but then also writes his name where it
says "write in". Personally, I think that overvotes should count, so I
think that Gore was the legitimate winner of Florida in 2000.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12623-2001Nov11.html

Of course, that doesn't take into account the butterfly ballots or the
GOP-friendly voter roll purges; had these things not occurred, I expect
Gore would have won by at least a couple thousand votes.

Anyway, I think that was a rather dark chapter in American history. It's a
scary time when political candidates openly and aggressively campaign
against recounting the votes when the original count is suspect; it shows
a blatant disrespect for the will of the people. Although perhaps openly
campaigning against verifiability for voting machines is scarier still.

James