unprecedented : the 2000 presidential election
richard ray perez greg palast danny glover george w. bush joan sekler unprecedented: the 2000 presidential election peter coyote katherine harris al gore
the 56 - minute 2002 documentary from public interest pictures and robert greenwald productions, “unprecedented: the 2000 presidential election ”, directed by richard ray perez and joan sekler, presents the sorry story of this affair .
despite its title, unprecedented: the 2000 presidential election is very much about precedence. considering intersections of race, money, influence, and political power, the documentary chronicles many of the snafus of the 2000 presidential election in florida, including illegal voter purges, intimidation at the polls, the infamous butterfly ballot, dimpled chads, media manipulation, and nepotism run amok .
unprecedented: the 2000 presidential election is the riveting story about the battle for the presidency in florida and the undermining of democracy in america. focusing on events leading up to election day and the attempt to count legally cast votes in the days that followed, unprecedented examines a suspicious pattern of irregularities, injustices and voter purges all in a state governed by the winning candidate’s brother .
i' ve been most anxious to view the dvd
unprecedented - the 2000 presidential election
, because i spent 15 years volunteering on numerous election campaigns when i lived in florida. because of my own personal experience i know the disputed territory and the election laws that were deliberately broken by jeb bush and katherine harris in 2000 extremely well. i' ve finally seen
unprecedented
and i' ve found 2 claims made in this documentary that are totally false .
the film chronicles irregularities in the 2000 us presidential election in the swing state of florida. the film then takes aim at the december 2000 supreme court decision that gave george w. bush the presidency. finally, it explores the problems with electronic voting machines .
in conclusion, it greatly disappoints me that the documentary
unprecedented
fails to tell the entire story of how bush stole the 2000 election. it sadly and falsely tries to blame al gore, the victim of the stolen election, for what the bush election stealers actually did. this is like trying to blame a rape victim for what the rapist did. i believe that it' s imperative that the american people know the full truth about bush' s theft of the 2000 election. i urge the producers of
unprecedented
to make the corrections that i' ve detailed so that the american people can know the real truth about bush' s theft of the 2000 election. bush' s theft of the 2000 election is one of the great tragedies in the history of our country. our country will be paying for the stolen 2000 election for generations to come. i think it' s wrong to add the additional tragedy of not telling the full truth about bush' s theft of the 2000 election on top of the election theft itself .
washington office on latin america. 2000 .
campaign finance: setting limits in 2000 ,
preface acknowledgments chronology of events introduction: courts and the political challenge of election 2000 1. who won? the election goes to court 2. changing the rules? the florida supreme court, round one 3. a shot across the bow: the u. s. supreme court enters the fray 4. gore’s last chance: the florida supreme court, round two 5. the dam breaks: five justices pick a president 6. the politics behind the votes that counted appendixes a. provisions of the u. s. constitution relating to election 2000 litigation b. provisions of federal statutory law relating to election 2000 litigation c. provisions of florida election law relating to election 2000 litigation d. highlights of major cases in the 2000 presidential election dispute notes selected bibliography table of cases index
and its long record of governing the nation to pull out just one more presidential win .
in a time when the virtues of democracy and freedom are touted as moral standards and justification for war, the exposure of u. s. failure in this arena is particularly chilling. unchecked, the electoral system and power structures that enabled the injustices of the 2000 presidential election in florida will not only influence, but perhaps decide the 2004 election. unprecedented is a call to action if ever there was one .
this election will have unprecedented impacts on mexico' s political development whether fox proves to govern successfully or not. his election ends the one - party hegemony of the pri and it likely will bolster democratic values among the mexican citizenry. indeed, during the course of the presidential campaign, mexicans' perceptions of how democratic their country is grew markedly (see
) - - delivering on the promise to get this film in front of the widest global audience possible before the u. s. presidential election, national geographic today announced that
unprecedented: the 2000 presidential election is the riveting story of the undermining of democracy in america. focusing on events leading up to election day and the foiled attempt to count legally cast votes, it examines the suspicious pattern of irregularities, injustices and voter purges in florida — a state governed by the winning candidate' s brother. what emerges is a disturbing picture of an election no one is sure who won. (
will hold you in a state of appalled enthralment
- - new yorker magazine )
7. author' s preliminary analysis of data from the mexico 2000 panel study, second cross - sectional survey, july 2000 .
the 2000 presidential election’s chicanery is explored in a 50 - minute docu from joan sekler and richard r. perez –a powerful piece of agitprop filmmaking seemingly designed to re - ignite a fire under democrats and perhaps make republicans take an honest look at their party’s actions. media outlets largely dropped coverage of the election after the supreme [ … ]
the first - ever book from cnn politics chronicles the most hard - fought and newsworthy election of our time—one that laid bare a deep divide across america. packed with exclusive photojournalism and new revelations straight from the front lines, unprecedented: the election that changed everything was written and reported while it happened. it is the first draft of history .
the long election of 2000 eventually settled the primary question, the identity of the new president. yet it raised new issues, even fundamental questions about the effectiveness and legitimacy of american institutions .
the 2000 election in florida played out in an environment where jeb bush (george w. bush’s brother) had angered the black community by rolling back affirmative action .
although we may never know with certainty the identity of the winner of this year' s presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. it is the nation' s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law .
the geography of the election reflected a changing pattern of party loyalties. as the nation endured this odd election at the beginning of the new millennium, major changes in the character of its political parties also emerged .
more mexicans split their tickets in 2000 than has been the case in the past, with the result that the congressional candidates for the alliance for change received considerably fewer votes than their presidential standard bearer. a divided legislature in both houses is the outcome (see
the 2000 presidential election' s chicanery is explored in a 50 - minute docu from joan sekler and richard r. perez - - a powerful piece of agitprop filmmaking seemingly designed to re - ignite a fire under democrats and perhaps make republicans take an honest look at their party' s actions .
before the flood — produced by leonardo dicaprio, fisher stevens, trevor davidoski, jennifer davisson, brett ratner and james packer and executive produced by martin scorsese — seeks to bring climate change discussions to the forefront before the u. s. presidential election
unprecedented uses specific examples of misconduct to support its claim of structural corruption. during the recount, much of the media coverage revolved around the public' s supposed impatience with the process, fueled by reports of
spontaneous
demonstrations to that effect. employing strategic freeze - frames of tv news footage, unprecedented names several paid republican staffers flown in to stage the demonstrations, thereby manufacturing dissent .
that decision ended the presidential contest, and george w. bush now heads the conservative restoration to power, buttressed by thin party control of both houses of congress. the election of 2000, however, will not fade. it encapsulates the political forces shaping the united states at the end of the twentieth century. its controversial results will affect the nation for many years of the new era .
global exchange / alianza cívica. 2000a .
the pre - electoral conditions in mexico 2000 ,
june. available at urltoken (accessed august 2, 2000) .
6. see global exchange / alianza cívica 2000a; corchado and iliff 2000 .
other featurettes in the
election edition
dvd consider voter participation, examine the philosophical stakes of the electoral process, and offer
critical perspectives
on the events of 2000. these additional materials underscore the urgency of unprecedented' s work. unfortunately, the majority of these documentaries - -
the voter purge ,
media malfeasance ,
response to a stolen election ,
critical perspectives ,
and
rise of corporate dominance
- - are repetitive or too brief, recycling content from the film .
with you - are - there writing and imagery, unprecedented unleashes new reporting through every twist and turn of an election that must go down as one of the greatest american news stories of all time. from an fbi investigation that refused to die to allegations of sexual assault to an outcome that surprised even the victor, the book depicts every jab between a major party’s first female presidential nominee and a political neophyte who many discounted. featuring a foreword by cnn’s chief washington correspondent, jake tapper, and an introduction by historian douglas brinkley, unprecedented unleashes new insight and emotion while telling a story that will change america forever .
the concluding words on the presidential election were spoken long ago, by benjamin franklin at the conclusion of the constitutional convention of 1787. when a spectator outside asked whether the framers had created a monarchy or a republic, franklin replied, hopefully ,
a republic, madam, if you can keep it .
[ 32 ] after the tumult, division, and enmity born of the election of 2000, americans will need to try harder if they still want to keep their republic .
global exchange / alianza cívica. 2000b .
mexican federal elections 2000: electoral observation report ,
july. available at urltoken (accessed august 2, 2000) .
i can further document with copies of the county ballot duplication logs that 10, 000 absentee ballots that the counting machines couldn' t read were in fact hand duplicated and counted as florida election law in 2000 allowed. these ballots favored bush by more than 2 to 1 and the bush campaign made no effort to block the counting of these votes. the gore campaign' s request asked for the same treatment for the ballots cast on election day that the counting machines couldn' t read. none of these critical facts are included in
unprecedented
.
in 2000 the result of this system would probably be a clear bush victory, despite his minority in the country. assuming the presidential vote had followed that for the house, bush would win 222 votes from the individual congressional districts where republicans won house seats, and he would add 60 votes from the 30 states he captured. this total of 282 electoral votes would be an even greater distortion of the popular vote than the actual results in the election .
the parties' capacities to run modern, media - intensive campaigns received a major boost between the last presidential election in 1994 and the 2000 race when the 1996 electoral reform made available ample public monies, both for ordinary operations and to finance campaigns (split 50 - 50 into those two broad areas). in addition, mexican electoral law now limits private funding of parties and campaigns to 49 percent of the
the 2000 presidential election’s chicanery is explored in a 50 - minute docu from joan sekler and richard r. perez –a powerful piece of agitprop filmmaking seemingly designed to re - ignite a fire under democrats and perhaps make republicans take an honest look at their party’s actions. media outlets largely dropped coverage of the election after the supreme court decision; remaining desire to investigate was muted in the post - 9 / 11 mood of national unity. pic is a first step in a return to examining what happened and deserves tv exposure. it could be used as an organizing tool for election reform groups as well .
in 1997, the pri suffered its worst defeat to date when the opposition parties denied it its majority in the chamber of deputies, forcing zedillo to govern in the context of divided government. that victory, combined with the win by cárdenas in the 1997 federal district election and several major triumphs in gubernatorial and municipal elections by the pan and the prd from 1995 onward, created the sense that the pri could be beaten. still, entering the 2000 presidential race, the pri hoped to count on a major economic recovery
5. the ife allocated 1. 5 billion pesos of public funds for the campaigns (more than $ 150 million), and an identical amount for other party functions during 2000. see de swaan (2000) .
a frequently heard proposal for change within the electoral college is to alter the means of choosing the electors within the individual states, which could be done simply by state legislatures without amending the u. s. constitution. imitating the system presently used in maine and nebraska, one elector could be awarded to the leading presidential candidate in each congressional district (corresponding to the members of the house), and two (corresponding to the state' s senators) could be awarded to the statewide winner. one immediate effect would be to extend the partisanship of congressional redistricting, known as gerrymandering, to the presidential election .
( 1 .) the standard deviation of the democratic vote was 9. 1 in the 2000 election, compared to 7. 0 in 1996 and 6. 0 in 1992. two - thirds of the states fall within this range, above or below the national average .
( 10 .) robert g. kaiser ,
is this any way to pick a winner ?
washington post, 26 may 2000. on the day of the election, the political scientists were less confident: david stout ,
experts, once certain, now say gore is a maybe ,
new york times, 7 november 2000 .
corchado, alfredo, and laurence iliff. 2000 .
ruling party has hold on voters ,
( 28 .) william kristol ,
crowning the imperial judiciary ,
new york times, 28 november 2000 .
unprecedented
is an unsettling account of the 2000 presidential election, which should have been an alarm call to american citizens to do one of two major things: become active in moving forward voting reform, or become more apathetic about the entire voting process. it' s another robert greenwald production, who has been well - known at putting together left leaning documentaries (on subjects such as walmart and rupert murdoch) about important social and political issues. even though this film tells the story of what put a republican in office, and therefore does spin the information to prove without a doubt that an election was
stolen
from a democrat, there are key societal issues that this film addresses that would hopefully affect viewers on a human level as opposed to a political level .
turnout may have made the difference in the election results. nationally, there was only a small increase over the last election in voter participation, to 51 percent of all adults, although there were considerable increases in the most contested states, particularly by union household members and african americans .
to keep the u. s. a democracy, with fair elections, you must see this and show it to friends. it' s rather shocking to see how easy it is for people in power to upstage the public' s right to elect their leaders. unprecedented details the events of the 2000 election from beginning to end. it puts the events in perspective so that you will see all of what actually occurred; all the
out of public view
maneuvering that did not get covered by the press. i was shocked and saddened to see what has become of our voting system, and the ability of a very few, carefully - placed, powerful actors to control and even change election outcomes. film also highlights the difficulties in having presidential campaign managers be the county registrar of voters. the film becomes an adult civics lesson, important to everyone who cares about democracy .
4. for a thorough report on campaign finance, see washington office on latin america (2000) .
the election carried implications for the parties beyond the confusing and close results of 2000. both could read the returns as encouraging portents for the future. the republicans had won control, however narrow, of all branches of the government. the congressional revolution of 1994, which ended four decades of democratic control, was maintained into a fourth republican term .
what was at stake in mexico' s 2000 presidential and congressional elections? how can we explain vicente fox' s surprising victory over the daunting pri? what will be the consequences of the fox win for mexican democracy? does the pri' s defeat tell us anything about an electoral route to democracy? let us briefly explore each of these questions .
klesner, joseph l. 2000 .
legacies of authoritarianism: political attitudes in mexico and chile .
in
montes, rodolfo, and rodrigo vera. 2000 .
los amigos de fox se niegan a desaparecer ,
source: exit poll by reforma, 3 july 2000, p. 8a. n = 3, 313 .
the discipline of the prd and the pri will be a key political issue because the july election has produced deep fissures in each party. while cárdenas and the pri' s manuel bartlett both came out with early statements that their parties would not cooperate with fox (dillon 2000; sandoval 2000), neither speaks for his whole party. both the pri and the prd are undergoing deep internal conflicts about their futures, with no resolution to these struggles yet attained .
beyond the presidency, the election of 2000 has raised troubling questions about the stability of american government generally. in the heat of the recount controversies, the integrity of the entire electoral process was questioned. both the gore and bush camps saw the opposition as preparing a
legal coup d' etat .
party competition was denigrated as illegitimate opposition, directly contradicting the basic premise of a healthy democracy .
( 30 .) andrew kohut ,
may either man win ,
new york times, 25 november 2000 .
still, the gender gap was evident again, but different from the past, in the presidential vote of 2000. while bush won 53 percent among men, he gained only 43 percent among women. gore' s opposite advantage among women (54 percent to 42 percent) was insufficient to overcome the texas governor. this
gap
between the sexes was the largest difference in the twenty years since it first became apparent .
( 3 .) this figure is the simple regression of the democratic percentage of the two - party vote in 2000 and 1996, excluding the outlying district of columbia. the correlation with the three - party vote of 1996 is. 95. correlation of the 2000 and 1992 vote is. 86 for the two - party vote and. 79 for the three - party vote .
ample evidence suggests that the pri did attempt to buy votes and to coerce poor voters and those who worked for public enterprises such as the state oil firm, pemex (global exchange 2000b). however, despite concerns about the pri' s organizational advantages on election day, the pri apparatus obviously did not carry the election for its candidate .
authored by top cnn writer thomas lake and edited by award - winning veteran political reporter jodi enda, unprecedented is filled with exclusive photos, commentary and insights from some of cnn’s greatest contributors, including author carl bernstein, correspondent brian stelter and pulitzer prize - winning photographer david hume kennerly. together, their work makes this book the ultimate way to feel and understand the epic event it chronicles, an election like no other .
vicente fox' s unexpected victory in mexico' s july 2, 2000 presidential elections puts a definitive end to mexico' s one - party regime. until now the longest ruling party in the world, the institutional revolutionary party (or pri) failed to turn out its core voters in numbers adequate to match the millions of mexicans who voted for change by supporting fox in the july balloting (see
the first false claim is that al gore should' ve requested a statewide count of the uncounted votes from the beginning. what
unprecedented
fails to point out is the fact that florida election law didn' t provide for a statewide count of the uncounted votes. all statewide candidates had the right to request hand counts in the counties where they disputed the vote counts. the gore campaign followed florida election law to the letter. in addition, the gore campaign requested the hand counts in the counties where there were the most uncounted votes. it turned out that these were the most heavily democratic counties in florida whose voters used what we now know was the most flawed voting system in florida, the punch card system. it turns out that the voters who used the punch card voting system were the voters least likely to have their votes counted .
in the federal district, the equivalent of mayor of mexico city. three parties effectively compete for power in mexico now where one once governed with little more than token opposition. the pan' s unprecedented success in the july balloting, however, has its two rivals reeling with internal conflicts about how to react to the changes in mexican politics .
only age, of the major social categories, did not show significant differences between groups. [ 7 ] in 2000 the united states was not united .
the gory details of the 2000 election results frenzy are portrayed in this documentary, giving the viewer more details that have been divulged since. the story has shamefully been forgotten since 2000, prehaps because of subsequent events, but should be brought to the forefront as we near election time once again. i saw this documentary in a movie theatre and hope that it will make its way to television at some point (which i believe it may have made it to the sundance channel). it is an important story to tell, and it is almost lost in the overwhelming amount of news since the election. an important and insightful side to this movie would be greg palast' s (who is featured in the film) book
the best democracy money can buy
, which has a section on the events described in the film .
the presidential race should have been a runaway, according to precampaign estimates. in the end, to be sure, the outcome came down to miscounting or manipulation of the last few ballots. analytically, however, the puzzling question is why gore did so badly, not why bush won .
and that campaign money was directed especially to television, where the evening' s soap operas and newscasts were financed by the usual detergent commercials and by spots for presidential candidates, spots whose production values rivaled those of u. s. political campaigns .
, across linear, digital, steaming and social platforms — making it the most - watched documentary in the world since 2000, and the most watched national geographic film ever released .
usually, the preferences of nonvoters are not much different from those who actually cast ballots, [ 19 ] but the 2000 election may have been an exception to that rule. cbs news polls immediately before and after the balloting suggested that, if every citizen had actually voted, both the popular and electoral votes would have led to an overwhelming gore victory. [ 20 ] the nonvoters, however, had less information about the election and less confidence in the political system, and they were less likely to see a difference between the parties. [ 21 ]
the film summarizes the recount and hanging chad fiasco, which went through several steps with the florida supreme court, and finally to the us supreme court, with the infamous bush v. gore opinion in december 2000 .
though its political leaning is no secret - - the dvd
campaign edition
is subtitled
how bush stole the 2000 presidential election
- - the film' s critical reach extends beyond simple partisan rivalries. virtually every frame exposes prejudicial practices and attitudes set in motion not just with the bush administration or the republican party, but with this country' s birth: the film reminds us that the entire electoral system was designed to exclude
undesirables
( read: minorities, the poor, and women) from governmental power centers. florida wasn' t a distortion of the electoral process; it was a direct reflection of historical forces at work .
unprecedented  the 2000 presidential elections is a movie all real americans must watch. it is a sickening look at just how corrupt our nation' s political parties have become. it happens in this case that the total lack of integrity falls on the republicans. improper, almost criminal, activities of the supreme court, katherine harris and her entire office, jeb bush and his entire office, dozens of congressmen and senators, scores of aides. all of them stealing the birth right of americans to suite their own nefarious need for power and the subjugation of the democratic process within our republic. the real question is not who was actually elected president, but whether true americans can learn from this travesty and take back america from the hands of these two despicable, corrupt, and immoral political parties .
mm: your last three films were shot and edited quickly and cheaply, and packaged and sold over the internet with a similar style of talking heads, existing footage and graphics. was there an “a ha” moment for you after the 2000 election when you hit upon this quick - draw method of production and distribution ?
if adopted, however, this new system would have its own problems. in a close election such as 2000, recounts would surely be demanded throughout the nation. the clumsy election administration evident in florida is not unique; defects exist in every state and county. a difference of only a hundred votes per county - as little as one vote in every other precinct - - would have reversed the results in 2000, so partisans would be mining every possible vein of new votes. a national recount would mean that the extended delays already experienced in the one state would be replicated everywhere, making it unlikely that america would have a president clearly accepted in time for the inauguration .
( 31 .) see, for example, the cbs news / new york times poll of 20 november and the washington post! abc news poll of 4 december 2000 .
two major divisions had structured american presidential elections for much of the twentieth century. [ 5 ] during the middle of the century, democrats dominated, building successive victories on economic and welfare issues and on the heritage of franklin roosevelt and the new deal. the major controversies between the parties centered on the role of the national government, particularly its distribution of taxes and benefits - - such as jobs, social security, and health care - - among different groups. democrats won all but two presidential elections from 1932 to 1964, assembling a winning coalition of lower - income voters, catholics, union members, blacks, and white southerners .
in addition ,
unprecedented
makes no mention of the serious software problem that had taken place in the democratic county of volusia - - that at one point showed al gore with a negative vote total. under florida election law in 2000 - - for al gore to have requested a statewide count of the uncounted votes from the beginning - - his campaign would' ve had to have filed hand count requests in all 67 of florida' s counties within 72 hours of election day - - because it' s the counties who actually count the votes. this was impossible. the bush campaign deliberately chose not to request any hand counts in any of the counties, because it knew that that would eventually result in all of the uncounted votes being counted. and they knew that this meant victory for al gore. the bush campaign was determined to prevent the counting of the uncounted votes at all costs. in addition, i have a tape of the nationally televised november 15, 2000 speech that al gore gave offering to drop all legal proceedings, if bush would agree to a statewide count of all of the uncounted votes. bush flatly refused to do so .
the election of 2000 merged or obliterated many of these divisions. during the clinton years, democrats overcame their losing reputation on moralistic issues, as clinton became identified with such stands as harsh treatment of criminals (including support for the death penalty) and welfare reform. the president maintained his popularity even after revelation of his sexual immorality, as seen in the failure of the republican effort to impeach and remove him from office .
( 7 .) this analysis is based on the vns national exit poll, as published in the new york times, 12 november 2000, supplemented by data provided by cbs news .
the dramatic struggle over the outcome of the 2000 presidential election presented judges with an extraordinary political challenge, as well as a historic political temptation. in the votes that counted howard gillman offers a comprehensive yet critical assessment of how well courts coped with the competing expectations for impartial justice and favorable partisan results. lively and authoritative, the book documents how the participants, the press, the academic community, and the public responded during these tension - filled thirty - six days. gillman also provides a serious yet accessible overview of the legal strategies and debates - from briefs and oral arguments to final decisions. however, in explaining the behavior of courts, he moves beyond an analysis of law to also take into account the influences of partisanship, judicial ideology, and broader political and historical contexts. appropriately, gillman pays special attention to the judges whose behavior generated the most controversy—the battling justices of the florida and united states supreme courts. after carefully reviewing the arguments for and against their decisions, he concludes that the five justices behind the bush v. gore decision acted outside what should be considered the acceptable boundaries of judicial power. gillman ends with an analysis of why they chose such an unprecedented course of action and an assessment of whether their partisan intervention will have any lasting effect on the supreme court’s reputation and authority .
. we cannot explore all of the consequences of this election for mexican democracy, but we should consider three aspects of the coming six - year term: divided government, the party system, and the central political issues that fox will face .
the presidential election of 2000 stands at best as a paradox, at worst as a scandal, of american democracy. democrat albert gore won the most votes, a half million more than his republican opponent george w. bush, but lost the presidency in the electoral college by a count of 271 - 267. even this count was suspect, dependent on the tally in florida, where many minority voters were denied the vote, ballots were confusing, and recounts were mishandled and manipulated. the choice of their leader came not from the citizens of the nation, but from lawyers battling for five weeks. the final decision was made not by 105 million voters, but by a 5 - 4 majority of the unelected u. s. supreme court, issuing a tainted and partisan verdict .
starting with the illegal and unscrupulous manipulation of florida' s voter registration rolls, this film follows the legal tennis match over the u. s. 2000 presidential election. the film is left - biased, with a majority of the commentators and interviewees being from florida civil rights advocacy organisations. that said, this film should anger and upset just about everyone. if you' re a see - no - evil conservative then you' ll think this film is all lies and propaganda; everyone else will be outraged at what the bush campaign got away with. the final arguments of the film about the supreme court seem a little flimsy, but the majority of the material presented is sound, well - documented, clearly understandable, and can be easily researched yourself if you want to pursue the matter further .
if you thought you knew the fact about what happened in november & december of 2000 this documentary surprises you with more hard evidence that the main stream media has refused to report. florida governor jeb bush and florida secretary of state harris planned for months before the election to purge the voter rolls of legally registered democrats. and there are signed memos to prove it. this investigative journalism is truly amazing .
fox' s victory reflects the new competitiveness in mexican politics. once able to expect to gain 70 percent of the votes, the pri dropped to about half of the ballots in the 1988 and 1994 presidential elections, and to below 40 percent in the 1997 midterm congressional elections. in 1997, though, the pri' s most threatening rival was not fox' s pan but the democratic revolutionary party (or prd) of cuauhtémoc cárdenas, who won the mexico city mayor' s race that year (klesner 1997) and who ran as the prd' s presidential candidate in 2000, his third outing as the left' s standard bearer. in the 1990s, opposition candidates from both the pan and the prd have won the municipal presidencies of most of mexico' s largest cities and many of its provincial capitals. before the july elections, the pan governed five of the nation' s thirty - two states and the prd five, mostly in coalition with other parties. on july 2, the pan added the gubernatorial seats in guanajuato and morelos while the prd' s andrés manuel lópez obrador retained for his party the position of
americans (and everyone else for that matter) need to see this film in order to understand how the american
democracy
has been undermined by highly sophisticated criminals. the 2000 election was stolen outright, but this alarming fact slipped under the noses of millions of americans who aren' t aware of how george w. bush came to be president in 2000. it is very probable that something similar happened in the 2004 election. it is time for people to become aware of the threats to democracy that exist and ensure that they do not persist, for if they do they will utterly destroy the american democracy. this is another very thought - provoking film from robert greenwald, who has another movie slated for november release: wal - mart: the high cost of low price .
furthermore, in early 2001, the orlando sentinel interviewed judge terry lewis, who was the judge assigned to oversee the count of the uncounted votes. he clearly said that he was going to count the overvotes where the intent of the voter was clear. the truth is, there are no vote count scenarios that bush wins - - when all of the uncounted votes are counted. not if just the undervotes are counted. not if both undervotes and overvotes combined are counted. none of these facts were included in
unprecedented' either .
( 21 .) reported by the vanishing voter project of harvard university' s john f. kennedy school of government (www. vanishingvoter. org), november 2000 .
because of the clinton - lewinsky - impeachment controversy, the personal traits of the next president became an important element in the 2000 election, and this was a principal source of bush' s appeal. the nation now may regain ritualistic
dignity and honor
in the white house, as both candidates pledged. it is less likely, however, to regain the political advantages of a strong presidency - - national unity, policy leadership, and inspiration to great goals .
1. on a ten - point scale, with 0 representing the far left and 10 the far right, respondents to a february survey placed the pri at 6. 8, the pan at 5. 5, and the prd at 3. 7. those same respondents placed themselves at 6. 5. mexico 2000 panel study, first wave, february 19 - 27, 2000. n = 2370 .
crespo, josé antonio. 2000 .
raising the bar: the next generation of electoral reforms in mexico ,
policy papers on the americas, center for strategic and international studies, washington, d. c .
sure the film seems biased. but this is largely due to the fact that the people behind the election fraud refused to step up to the camera in their own defense. this lack of action alone speaks volumes. common sense tells me that the 2000 election was clearly not what it seemed, that' s for sure. there' s a lot of information on this us government web site. those of you getting your news from tv, radio and magazines will be surprised at what is revealed there the united states commission on civil rights seems to have investigated this matter rather thoroughly. are there any other government agencies printing any other version of the story ?
be financed by the public monies. the public funds are distributed to the parties based on a complicated formula that seeks to reward the parties somewhat in proportion to their relative popularity (as measured by the last election). the public funding has been generous. for example, the pri received almost us $ 100 million of total public funding in 2000, half of which it could spend on its campaigns, and it could raise almost another $ 50 million from private sources .
i do recall the night of the 2000 election. i was at a party in st. paul, when nbc called florida for gore. i was driving to another gathering with the libertarian party of minnesota in edina, stopped at a railroad crossing somewhere, when i heard on the radio that the florida result had been pulled back into “undecided”. what the networks giveth, the networks taketh away. it turned out that the media would pull back florida again even after giving it to bush .
introduced by danny glover, the film uses traditional documentary devices - - talking heads, press footage, witness interviews - - to generate a compelling argument: the republican party used two
tool sets
to win the 2000 presidential election. first up: a series of well - planned, shady, and sometimes lucky machinations, particularly through the
good ole boy
network, with republican campaign coordinator and florida secretary of state katherine harris and governor jeb bush as key players. next: u. s. racist and classist inclinations. what' s more, the documentary goes on to suggest, in the current climate of corporate media, soft money, and computerization, that' s how all elections can be won .
the hand counts that al gore had correctly requested under florida election law in 2000 should' ve been carried out, as hand counts were a routine and an accepted part of the election process in florida. i certainly remember them taking place in the 15 years i was in florida volunteering on election campaigns. the hand counts that al gore requested were illegally blocked by the actions of both katherine harris and jeb bush who were determined to trample the will of the people of florida and install jeb' s brother. and that' s exactly what they did. in fact, i' ve since acquired a transcript of a meeting of the pinellas county canvassing board, that voted to conduct a hand count in that county in a local fire department advisory board race, which changed the outcome of that race. this was at the very same time that katherine harris was on national tv illegally blocking the very same type of request made by the gore campaign .
estévez, federico and alejandro moreno. 2000 .
campaign effects and issue - voting in the pri primary .
paper prepared for the xxii international congress of the latin american studies association, miami, march 16 - 18 .
the 2nd totally false claim made in
unprecedented
is that bush would' ve won if only the undervotes had been counted. this is completely false and a creation of the pro - bush media. i have the miami herald' s own count of the uncounted votes and when all of the uncounted undervotes are counted al gore wins. in order to invent this so - called
win
for bush, the pro bush media distorted the florida supreme courts ruling and didn' t count the many thousands of uncounted votes in broward and palm beach counties that the bush campaign had successfully and illegally blocked from being counted. in the first couple of sentences of it' s decision, the florida supreme court clearly called for the counting of all uncounted votes, where the intent of the voter is clear. this is what the law was in florida in 2000 .
newspaper, for example, had labastida ahead of fox by three percentage points (equal to the margin of error) in its last poll taken two weeks before the election, a margin that had not changed in the previous month. indeed, in
( 9 .) gary langer ,
new republican, old issues ,
analyzing the abc news poll, reported at (www. abcnews. go. com), november 2000 .
it' s easy for conservatives to dismiss unprecedented as liberal propaganda because the truth is much uglier. this film impressively documents a plan enacted by the bush campaign with help from jeb bush and katherine harris to steal the election and ensure a victory in florida. it does not make bold and ridiculous statements, but instead goes through each aspect of the story and makes its point convincingly. in retrospect, this case is even stronger given what' s happened in the past four years. the filmmakers do an excellent job in presenting the facts without distorting the truth. especially interesting are the comments about gore' s mistakes, which were also designed to generate specific results. if his campaign had seen the big picture, this country might be in a much different place this year .
more generally, gore neglected to put the election into a broader context - - of the administration' s record, of party, or of the republican record in congress. all of these elements might have been used to bolster his chances, but he, along with bush, instead made the election a contest between two individuals and their personal programs. in editing his own message so severely, gore made it less persuasive. if the campaign were to be only a choice of future programs, with their great uncertainties, a bush program might be as convincing to the voters as a gore program. if the election were to be only a choice of the manager of a consensual agenda, bush' s individual qualities might well be more attractive .
not only two candidates, but virtually two nations confronted each other in the election of 2000. while gore and bush received essentially identical support in the total popular vote, they drew this support from very different constituencies. the electoral map (figure 1) illustrates the cleavage. in carrying the preponderance of states (30), bush changed the landscape of american politics. he swept the interior of the nation, including great swaths of the nation' s territory in the south, border, plains, and mountain areas. gore won in only 20 states (and the district of columbia), almost all on the geographical fringes of the nation - - bordering the atlantic ocean (north of the potomac), the pacific ocean, and the great lakes .
throughout the campaign, fox emphasized that his goal was to remove the pri from the presidency and thereby transform the mexican regime. to do that, he adopted in a variety of strategies novel in the mexican context. to begin, he openly sought his party' s presidential nomination more than two years before the formal nomination stage. to help to finance this pre - campaign and to gain new supporters, fox created an organization called
public outrage over the felon lists and voter purges spilled into street protests and congressional hearings, but was under - reported by the mainstream media. though this development is largely ignored in the main film, it is closely examined in some of the dvd extras. in the featurette ,
media malfeasance ,
filmmakers perez and sekler center on the conflation of media with politics. most of the reporting focused on dangling chads and recounts, downplaying voter purges and connections between the bush camp and the officials calling the election. the filmmakers argue that such behavior, including the calling, un - calling, and recalling of florida' s votes on election night, laid the foundation for the supreme court' s decision .
the most obvious change would be to abolish the electoral college altogether and to choose the president by direct popular vote. in 2000 the result would have been a narrow gore victory. realistically, this change is unlikely to pass the difficult barriers to constitutional amendment, since the present system works to the advantage of small states, which could prevent an amendment from passing the senate or the state legislatures .
the film received an unprecedented rollout, first with a limited theatrical release in new york, los angeles and london, then making its global television debut this past sunday, oct. 30, on national geographic channel in 171 countries and 45 languages. it is also available for seven days through nov. 6 for free on a record number of digital and streaming platforms. this global rollout is part of the network’s continued commitment to covering climate change .
by 2000 the parties' supporters had become philosophically coherent as well. fewer than one of every thirteen republicans considered themselves liberals, and fewer than one in eight democrats were conservatives. voters also responded to the ideological difference between the parties: four out of five self - identified liberals voted democratic, and the same proportion of conservatives voted republican, often giving greater weight to ideological preference than to traditional party loyalty (see table 1). the partisan contest of 2000 was also an ideological conflict.
unprecedented : the 2000 presidential election is a 2002 47-minute documentary directed and co-written by richard ray pérez and joan sekler , and narrated by peter coyote , about the contested 2000 presidential election in florida . it was re-released in an extended 56-minute 2004 campaign edition presented by danny glover to tie in with the 2004 us presidential election . a public interest pictures film , it was co-executive produced by robert greenwald and earl katz . . greenwald later made this the first of his " un-trilogy " , which also includes uncovered : the war on iraq and unconstitutional : the war on our civil liberties . 
unprecedented: the 2000 presidential election is a 2002 47-minute documentary directed and co-written by richard ray pérez and joan sekler, and narrated by peter coyote, about the contested 2000 presidential election in florida. it was re-released in an extended 56-minute 2004 campaign edition presented by danny glover to tie in with the 2004 us presidential election. a public interest pictures film, it was co-executive produced by robert greenwald and earl katz.. greenwald later made this the first of his " un-trilogy ", which also includes uncovered: the war on iraq and unconstitutional: the war on our civil liberties.
unprecedented: the 2000 presidential election is a 2002 47-minute documentary directed and co-written by richard ray pérez and joan sekler, and narrated by peter coyote, about the contested 2000 presidential election in florida. it was re-released in an extended 56-minute 2004 campaign edition presented by danny glover to tie in with the 2004 us presidential election. a public interest pictures film, it was co-executive produced by robert greenwald and earl katz.. greenwald later made this the first of his " un-trilogy ", which also includes uncovered: the war on iraq and unconstitutional: the war on our civil liberties.