Slate's Bizbox
ballot box: Politics and policy.

Why 19,120 People Voted Twice

Jacob Weisberg
Posted Thursday, Nov. 9, 2000, at 5:12 PM ET

If you look at that Palm Beach ballot, it's easy to understand how 3,000 or so people might have made the mistake of voting for Pat Buchanan when they meant to vote for Al Gore. But why would a much larger number of people--19,120 out of 461,988 who voted--invalidate their ballots by voting for two candidates for president?

One possibility suggested by a lawyer friend of mine: A large proportion of those people thought they were voting separately for the offices of president and vice president. Look at the ballot again. Each pair of candidates appears inside a box. The presidential candidate's name appears on one line, his running mate's name on the next line. Many Democratic voters might have punched the two seemingly adjacent holes, thinking they were voting separately for Al Gore and Joe Lieberman.

This mistake is made even more likely by the confusing ballot instructions on the left side of the ballot. The instructions should say, "Vote for one." Instead, they read, "Electors for President and Vice President (A vote for the candidates will actually be a vote for their electors.) (Vote for Group)." "Electors" and "candidates" are plural terms." Group" is a singular term that sounds like a plural one.

That people thought they were voting separately for the president and vice president would explain two anomalies in the story so far. First, it would explain why only 3,783 made the mistake of voting for two candidates in the Senate race, which appears next on the ballot. Senatorial candidates don't have running mates. Second, it would explain why we've heard so many complaints from people who think they voted for the wrong guy, but few from people who think they spoiled their ballot by voting twice. Most of the people who voted twice don't realize they made a mistake! If they had, many would have done something about it while still at the polling place. If you screw up your ballot by punching the wrong hole, you don't simply punch another hole. You turn in your spoiled ballot and ask for a replacement.

The spoiled ballots themselves should tell the story. A little old lady who thought she was voting for Gore and Lieberman probably would not have punched the second and third holes, in effect voting for Buchanan and Gore. More likely, she would have punched the third and fourth holes, voting for Gore and David McReynolds, the Socialist Party candidate for president. Likewise, if someone tried to vote for Bush and Cheney, he would probably have punched the first and second holes -- for Bush and Buchanan.

And if my friend's theory is correct, it suggests a possible remedy short of a re-vote. A judge could re-validate those ballots where the intention is evident. A vote for Gore and McReynolds was meant as a vote for Gore-Lieberman. A vote for Bush and Buchanan was meant as a vote for Bush-Cheney.

Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Jacob Weisberg is editor-in-chief of the Slate Group and author of The Bush Tragedy.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Reader Comments from The Fray:


Whatever you may think of 19,000+ people double voting in Palm Beach in 2000, 15,000+ people did exactly the same thing four years ago. Those ballots were thrown out in both elections, as they should be. Neither the voters, nor the election officials who create the ballots, learned a thing from the 1996 mistakes.

What is unfortunate is that the public debate of this problem is focused on Palm Beach and the truth is this happens, in every election, all over the country. All over the country votes are collected and counted by an army of volunteers. They get misplaced and counted late, ballots are disqualified, and absentee ballots are counted 10 days later. We have never paid attention to this incompetence because we never needed to. Who cares about 19,000 votes if the winning margin is 250,000?

We may not have an election this close for another 100 years, it sure is one for the history books (I kind of like living through an historic footnote). Still, if we want our voting process to enter the 21st century, we need to do this with computers. I humbly suggest commandeering ATM machines for the day. Everyone uses them to bank so they think they are secure. Everyone knows how to use them and if a mistake is made, you get to do it over until you get it right. They are everywhere, which would keep the lines to a minimum. Voter registration cards could have a smart chip giving those who are registered access to the system. We have got to do something, this is embarrassing.

--Donna Sabin

(To reply, click here.)


Nice theory but...I would not feel comfortable with a judge deciding the intentions of the voters. I would also suggest if you can't fill out a ballot properly it doesn't deserve to be counted. You can't change the rules of the race after it has been completed. After the Florida votes are verified whomever the loser is should concede: end of story.

--Dave

(To reply, click here.)


Maybe the people who thought they were voting for Pres & Vpres really did vote right, maybe they don't like Lieberman.

Maybe the Dems where cheating by telling their people to vote twice and these poor people thought they meant on the same ballot instead of 2 ballots. (The one who didn't get caught punched the Gore hole twice thinking it would count as 2 votes.)

Fact is, if most of these ballots are credited to elderly, these people have been voting long enough to know you only cast 1 vote for the pair.

Why aren't there Bush / Buchanan combination double votes? Are Reps smarter than Dems? (another story)

Everyone knows if you make a mistake, you get another ballot. If the Dems are assuming that the elderly are the ones making mistakes, then it seems to me that the Dems are the ones who don't respect the elderly.

--Mike

(To reply, click here.)

(11/9)

Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Assessing Sarah Palin
| Newt Gingrich, Grover Norquist, John Podesta and others weigh in.
Colbert King: She's No HillaryEditorial: Is She Ready for This?
PLUS » PostPartisan: Quick Takes from Opinions