So over a year after the actual election, he media consortium that was charged with investigating the Florida vote count has issued it's results. The consortium applied its ballot review to nine scenarios for recounting ballots. The first two attempt to model historical events as closely as possible. The others, while taking court and political party actions into consideration, are more hypothetical. All are based on two out of three reviewers agreeing about whether a mark occurs by a candidate's name. Ironically, it seems that in several cases the candidates were working against themselves. If each had let the other candidate's vote counting method be used (and acted like the bigger man) they would have won themselves. Still though, in most cases including using the toughest standards, Gore would, and should have won. Therefore:
If the U.S. Supreme Court hadn't stopped the counting
Dec. 9 count/Counties' own standards -- Bush by 493
What might have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court hadn't stopped a hand count ordered by the state Supreme Court of all the state's under-votes. Scenario uses the results of the counties that actually finished their hand counts and, for those that didn't finish, applies the standards those counties planned to use. Also counts some over-votes in nine counties.
If the four counties Gore wanted to count had finished
Gore's four-county strategy -- Bush by 225
What might have happened if the four Democratic counties in which Al Gore sought hand counts had finished in time to be included in the state's certified vote total. Scenario adds the actual results of Palm Beach County and the 139 counted Miami-Dade precincts to the state certified total (which already includes Broward and Volusia). Consortium numbers are used only for the remaining Miami-Dade precincts. Ballots with one corner of a chad detached or better are considered votes.
If all counties had used the Bush standard
Statewide count/Bush standard -- Gore by 105
Applies the standard generally accepted by George W. Bush's lawyers during the hand counts in the three punch-card counties where Gore sought counts: ballots with at least two corners of a chad detached. All affirmative marks accepted in optical-scan counties. If all counties had used the Palm Beach County standard
If all counties agreed to use the standard acceptable to most
Statewide count/Prevailing standards -- Gore by 60
Applies to all counties the standard a majority of elections officials said they would accept as an indicator of voter intent, based on a survey by consortium members: a single-corner detached chad in punch-card counties and all "affirmative" marks in optical-scan counties. An affirmative mark is any mark that indicates voter intent, including a filled oval, another mark such as an X through the oval, circles or mark around or near the oval, and circles or marks around or near the candidate's name or party. Applied to all under- and over-votes statewide, except Volusia.
If the 63 counties ordered to count had used one standard Dec. 9
Dec. 9 count/Uniform standard-- Bush by 430
Dec. 9 again, but this time using the actual hand counts only from Palm Beach, Broward, Volusia and Miami Dade (139 precincts) and applying a uniform standard to only the under-votes in the other 63 counties and Miami-Dade's remaining precincts: one-corner detached on punch cards and all affirmative marks on optical-scan.
If the 63 counties ordered to count had used their own standards
Statewide count/Custom standard -- Gore by 171
Best guess at what an unrestricted statewide hand recount might have been. Uses actual hand counts from Broward and Volusia and consortium applies each county's own standard in other 65 counties.
If all counties had used the Gore standard
Statewide count/ Most inclusive standard -- Gore by 107
Any "dimpled chad or better" counts as vote in punch-card counties, and all affirmative marks in optical-scan counties.
**If all counties had used the toughest standard**
Statewide count/ Most restrictive standard -- Gore by 115
Counts only so-called "perfect" ballots that machines somehow missed, including fully punched chads and properly marked optical ballots that scanners could not read because of problems such as ink color, humidity and misalignment.
