Replies

summer,in order for your thesis to be true, you would have to show that there was a massive shift of environmental votes from Al Gore to Ralph Nader, or alternatively, that huge numbers of Gore voters stayed at home.

Let's look at the numbers:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/elections/2000/results/whitehouse/

In Florida, Ralph Nader actually did poorer than he did nationwide. Nationally, Nader garnered 2.68% of the vote, while in Florida, Nader earned only about half that many, 1.63%.

That hardly looks like a massive shift of environmental votes from Gore to Nader.

How about the second question, did Florida environmental voters stay home on election day?

Again, the answer is no. Voter turnout in Florida in 2000 was 70%, higher even than 67% recorded in the 1996 election (see http://election.dos.state.fl.us/online/voterpercent.shtml).

Furthermore, in 2000, 400 thousand more votes were cast for Al Gore than were cast for Bill Clinton's during his "Landslide" four years ealier (2,912,253 vs. 2,546,870).

Nope, environmentally minded voters did not stay home on election day 2000, and they did not cast their votes for Ralph Nader. The Everglades airport is a non-issue.

summer, in order for your thesis to be true...

It's not "my" thesis. I wrote in my editorial about actual events. Dick Morris also wrote about actual events. Read Dick Morris' book. I don't even know Dick Morris, but it's kind of amazing that he, and media sources as diverse as a local magazine and a national radio show (and me on my computer) -- and Dick Morris -- all say the same basic thing: there was an explosive issue here. Al Gore ignored it. Voters walked away from him. And, BTW, folks -- that's how one LOSES an election!

I'm thinking now Al Gore has been in denial on this as much as you are now, and that's why it tool the WP over a year to hit the keyboard.

Not only that, but the Everglades remains a huge issue -- only now, it is a HUGE feather in the cap of one GOP GOv Jeb Bush and one GOP President GW. Again, I realize: you are not in FL. Just as I could not possibly tell you how impoirtant or unimporant a local issue mught be in your state.

But, if you are at all astute, you might be curious at how dedicated GW and Jeb were to the environmental issues here in FL. Could it be that one FL gov understands the voters in his own state? A state where there are more registered Dems than GOP voters? And, a state where independents like myself are the ones who actually decided every election? I am not an expert on politics, but, I think our governor and his brother the president recognize a whole lot more than Al Gore -- and you -- do about FL voters.

In addition, Jeb and GW did a great job on this issue. Dems may be just starting to wake up to the damage this is causing Dems...

BTW, if you want, you can certainly write to Nathaniel Reed, a conservative, mentioned below, and ask him how he came up with his numbers:

To the White House, by Way of the Everglades

By Michael Grunwald
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 23, 2002; Page A16

HOMESTEAD, Fla. -- Al Gore's people blame the environmentalists, although some admit they didn't think much of Gore's fence-sitting strategy. The environmentalists blame Gore, although some admit to twinges of regret about kneecapping one of the most earth-friendly presidential candidates in history. But both sides agree that in the closest state in the closest election ever, the bizarre swamp politics of the Everglades sent George W. Bush to the Oval Office.

In a presidential race decided by 537 votes in Florida and one in the Supreme Court, there were plenty of tipping points. But the refusal of Democratic candidate Gore to denounce an airport proposed at the edge of the Everglades -- and his subsequent loss of local support to Green Party candidate Ralph Nader -- was certainly one of the bigger ones.

Nathaniel Reed, a prominent South Florida conservationist who served in the Nixon administration, said the airport issue cost Gore "conservatively, at least 10,000 votes." ....