The 2004 Election

Although Bush received a majority of the popular vote: 50.73% to Kerry's 48.27%, it was—percentage-wise—the closest popular margin ever for a sitting President; Bush received 2.5% more than Kerry; the closest previous margin won by a sitting President was 3.2% for Woodrow Wilson in 1916. In terms of absolute number of popular votes, his victory margin (approximately 3 million votes) was the smallest of any sitting President since Harry S. Truman in 1948.


30.52% of Americans were recorded as having voted for Bush, although 1/3
      of the voting machines were demonstrably unreliable...

29.12% of Americans were recorded as having voted for Kerry, although exit
      polls indicated he won more votes than the machines recorded.

40.36% of eligible American voters chose other candidates or did not vote.

 

Election controversy

Main articles: 2004 U.S. election voting controversies (summary); 2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities (detail).

After the election, some sources reported indications of possible data irregularities and systematic flaws during the voting process, which are covered in detail by the election controversy articles. Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee, and other political organizations, are investigating further. No comprehensive independently reviewed analyses have yet been publicly released, but the People for the American Way Foundation produced a preliminary report on vote suppression in the election (pdf) and the House Judiciary Committee Democrats released a 100-page status report (pdf) on irregularities and potential illegal conduct in Ohio.

One part of the controversy relates to electronic and optical-scan voting machines, which were used in greater numbers than before due to concerns over the reliability of manual machines raised during the 2000 election. Other reported problems relate to abnormally high voter turnout (more votes in many precincts than registered voters in said precincts), discrepancies between exit poll data and actual results especially in swing states, and the complications which arose due to machine shortages, particularly in highly Democrat areas and in closely contested states.

Although the overall result of the election was not challenged by the Kerry campaign, third-party presidential candidates David Cobb and Michael Badnarik obtained a recount in Ohio. This recount was completed December 28, 2004, amid allegations of illegal recount procedures in many counties.

At the official counting of the electoral votes on January 6, a motion was made contesting Ohio's electoral votes. Because the motion was supported by at least one member of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, election law mandated that each house retire to debate and vote on the motion. In the House of Representatives, the motion was supported by 31 Democrats. It was opposed by 178 Republicans, 88 Democrats and one independent. Not voting were 52 Republicans and 80 Democrats. [16] Four people elected to the House had not yet taken office, and one seat was vacant. In the Senate, it was supported only by its maker, Senator Boxer, with 74 Senators opposed and 25 not voting. During the debate, not one Senator, either Democrat or Republican, argued that the outcome of the election should be changed by either court challenge or revote. Senator Boxer claimed that she had made the motion not to challenge the outcome, but to "shed the light of truth on these irregularities."
Return to www.UnionResource.org/                                                                         return to www.WritingResource.org/