The 2,380 number is total bunk. It's quite hard indeed to swallow that
even a few hundred voters could have been affected by a 10-minute interm,
but I'm going to consider it to be true anyway. Why? Because I think it
is time someone pointed out that it is entirely irrelevent.
Let us assume that 5,000 people claim that they would have voted Bush had
the errant call not been made. Let us further assume that there were no
Gore supporters of the same type. The question is not whether the early,
errant call made them not vote, but whether the eariler, -correct- call
(tossup state, at 7 PM ET) transformed this Bush supporters into likely
voters.
We know a few things about each of these 5,000 people, assuming they tell
the truth. As of 7:45 pm ET, they were non-voters. They also had access
to a TV, radio, internet feed, or had a friend on the phone giving them
results. Unless they were on a cell phone or in the car listening to the
radio, chances are they were immobile and inertia would prevent them from
not voting.
But a Bush partisan would have significant incentive to vote if Florida was
announced "too close to call" while Pennsylvania was called for Gore. The
vast, vast majority of those non-voters blaming the mis-call were
non-voters before Florida was called a tossup anyway.
It's unfair to blame the networks for supressed voter turnout. In fact,
they may had -added- to Panhandle turnout.
Dan Lewis
At 02:46 PM 11/17/00 -0500, John Samples wrote:
>This morning's papers also brought this:
>
>"A survey of more than 35,000 Florida Panhandle registered voters conducted
>by the Republican Leadership Council found that 2,380 Bush supporters didn't
>vote in this election, citing the errant call."
>
>A straight extrapolation from this would suggest Bush lost over 17,000
>voters in the Panhandle to the early call or about 6% of his overall total.
>I too find it hard to believe that ten minutes could make such a difference
>or that any effect of the early call would be skewed exclusively to
>potential Republican voters.
>
>I suspect we will find out more in the months to come.
>
>John Samples
>Cato Institute
>Washington, DC
>
>
