There is no jurisdiction ANYWHERE IN THE NATION where a so-called "overvote" is counted as a legal vote. These are ballots on which the voter makes two or more (some have all twelve presidential candidates marked) when the instructions for that office say == on the ballot and on the wall of the polling place, "VOTE FOR ONE."
All of us who graduated third grade know exactly why these are not legitimate votes. In third grade we took our first standardized tests, using answer sheets where little ovals had to be blackened in so they could be "read by a computer." Every one of use who made it through the third grade were instructed to make "one answer mark per question." And, we were told that "two marks counted as a wrong answer, even if one of the two marked was the correct answer."
I repeat one more time, an overvote is ALWAYS an illegal vote, because it violates the instructions in a way that every competent nine-year-old in the nation well understands. That is why not even the left=leaning, Democratic Flroida Supreme Court itself ever considered for a nanosecond requiring a recount of "overvotes," because under Florida law -- and the law of every other jurisdiction -- these are illegal votes by definition. No ifs. ands. or buts about it.
There is good evidence to suggest that Lott and Glassman are correct, that some of the "overvotes" were created by black Democratic election officials, in order to invalidate the few (but significant in an election this close) black Republican votes for Bush.
But that doesn't have to be taken into consideration. Without "overvotes," meaning facially illegal votes, Gore lost. So says every research story on the subject including amazingly, CNN an the New York Times. The article posted at the top therefore is a waste of ink and electrons. It can be summarized thusly -- if illegal votes had been somehow counted, Gore would have won.
To the editors and writers of such nonsense, I say, "And your point is...?
Congressman Billybob
So, what you're saying is that, if Gore wants to, he can rightly refer to himself as "The Felon's President"? ;-)